[Instalment 1] Essay/analytical commentary practice

[Joseph41]

Bang!

The very first analytical commentary/essay practice has arrived. This week I've gone with a transcript of an informal spoken conversation, as it was correctly pointed out to me that that would be most relevant at this time of year.

You can find the text attached. I modified the text from this website here (Better@English), which provides some neat conversation transcripts.

Your task?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Write an analytical commentary on the language example attached. In your response, you should comment on:
- contextual factors surrounding the text;
- social purpose and register of the text; and
- stylistic and discourse features of the text (so essentially, precisely the same as VCAA).

Refer to at least two subsystems in your response.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And then if you want feedback, post it here! Good luck!

[minajneb]

Thank you 

[Joseph41]

Thank you 

Not a problem at all, minajneb! Feel free to post whatever you come up with (you could even write on part of the text, or on just one subsystem), and we'll make sure to hit you back with some feedback.

[cookiedream]

Is it too late now to write and submit an analytical commentary on this transcript

[Joseph41]

Is it too late now to write and submit an analytical commentary on this transcript

Go for it.

[syubi]

Sooo, I guess I'll be the first and share my second practice piece I've ever done for analytical commentary. I know my writing/flow is not exactly there yet so would love any feedback and CC if possible!!

This text is slightly informal conversation shared between two interlocutors and friends, Michael (M) and Lori (L). The conversation occurring between the pair contains the primary purpose to build rapport and lessening social distance by discussing the domains of L’s neighbour, living circumstances and career. This informal conversation develops the relationship between the interlocutors through the use of stylistic features that support their small talk.

The participants aim to lessen their social distance and meet each other’s positive face needs. The two participants are classified by friends, but the development of their friendship is evidenced by the frequent initiation of topics by M. M begins the conversation with the discourse particle “so” (li 1), followed by the aural cue of the question “do you live in a house or an apartment?” (li 1) prompting an answer from L. M also shows greater power in topic management, achieved through the use of interrogatives, “I thought you said you were a musician?” (li 3) and “how do you get around playing…when you live in an apartment?” (li 4), which allow M to steer the conversation and to purposely learn more about L’s personal life and meeting L’s positive face needs. L’s identity is also revealed through the text that she is a musician and incorporates lexical terms into the field of music into the discourse. Lexemes such as “equipment” (li 5) and “headphones” (li 6) are used to describe her process when it comes to practicing and not being a disturbance to the neighbours.

Furthermore, the phatic purpose of this text builds the interlocutors’ relationship which is clearly reflected through the use of prosodics and turn-taking. Conforming to the spoken mode of the text, short pauses “by…who” (li 14) and “yeah…yeah” (li 16), show spontaneity and lack of planning of their small talk. Greater stress and volume on lexis also provide a dynamic in their speech. “SO” (li 21) and “ANY” (li 21) conveys L’s light humour and complaint towards her neighbour playing music loudly. As M frequently manages the topic in this conversation, L is a co-operative speaker and holds the floor to lessen the social distance through her anecdotes, “I have this neighbour…” (li 9). L also tends to invite M back into the conversation through the interjection “You know that song?” (li 16) to meet the other’s positive face needs.

The primary function of this text is to build rapport through detailing information of L’s neighbour, and current living situation and entertainment through anecdotes. This can be seen through the referral to musical lexemes to indicate the semantic field of music, “equipment” (li 5)” and “headphones” (li 6), creates coherence in the speech. When the semantic field switches to one of L’s neighbour, the function of entertainment occurs as L recalls her anecdote surrounding her neighbour playing a song loudly every weekend. Lexical terms and phrases such as “adjoining apartments” (li 10) and referral to a “neighbour” (li 9) or “neighbours” (li 6) support the semantic field of housing and apartments.

To build further upon their friendship, a slightly informal register is maintained in the conversation of the interlocutors. It is stated that the pair are friends, however they do not share great intimacy or familiarity with each other and slight planning in their conversation is required. This is shown through the repetition of speech by both interlocutors, “but, but” (li 3), “Well, well” (li 5) and the informal discourse particles “yeah yeah yeah… yeah” (li 14), which show that speakers require more time to think about their speech whilst holding the floor. False starts and repairs also frequent the conversation, “who who’s that, what” (li 12) and the repetition in “I, I guess” (li 20) demonstrates the spontaneity of the text and informal register of the text. The presence of the interjections “Oh man” (li 9) and “Oh my God” (li 14) also contribute to the informality of the conversation by expressing emotions to each other creating familiarity and intimacy.

[Joseph41]

Hey, syubi!

Congratulations for being the first one to contribute.



My comments attached in the quote (in red). Nice job!

Sooo, I guess I'll be the first and share my second practice piece I've ever done for analytical commentary. I know my writing/flow is not exactly there yet so would love any feedback and CC if possible!!

This text is a slightly informal conversation shared between two interlocutors and friends, Michael (M) and Lori (L). Perhaps personal preference, but “slightly informal” sounds a bit weird to me – perhaps relatively informal? The conversation occurring between the pair contains the primary purpose to build rapport and lessening social distance by discussing the domains of L’s neighbour, living circumstances and career. This informal conversation develops the relationship between the interlocutors through the use of stylistic features that support their small talk. I like how you’ve introduced the text, here. I’d probably try to flesh it out slightly more, though. Some other things you might like to consider are: the mode of the text (spoken/written), the audience (if any), and the social role of each of the speakers. Otherwise I think it’s a solid start, although some of the phrasing is slightly clunky.

The participants aim to lessen their social distance and meet each other’s positive face needs. The two participants are classified by as? friends, but the development of their friendship is evidenced by the frequent initiation of topics by M. I don’t quite follow – what do you mean by “the development of their friendship?” Do you mean that their close social proximity is exemplified by the linguistic features you go on to identify? M begins the conversation with the discourse particle “so” (li 1), followed by the aural cue of the question “do you live in a house or an apartment?” (li 1) prompting an answer from L. M also shows greater power in topic management, achieved through the use of interrogatives, “I thought you said you were a musician?” (li 3) and “how do you get around playing…when you live in an apartment?” (li 4), which allow M to steer the conversation and to purposely learn more about L’s personal life and meeting L’s positive face needs. Nice discussion of topic management, here. L’s identity is also revealed through the text that she is a musician and incorporates lexical terms into from? the field of music into the discourse. Lexemes such as “equipment” (li 5) and “headphones” (li 6) are used to describe her process when it comes to practising and not being a disturbance to the neighbours. Good examples – I particularly like how you’ve included the line number; that’s important.

Furthermore, the phatic purpose of this text builds the interlocutors’ relationship, which is clearly reflected through the use of prosodics and turn-taking. Nice signposting. I actually had some slight difficulty following the previous paragraph, because it all seemed a bit scattered – I think this one is better. Conforming to the spoken mode of the text, short pauses “by…who” (li 14) and “yeah…yeah” (li 16), show spontaneity and lack of planning of their small talk. Great! Greater stress and volume on lexis also provide a dynamic in their speech. “SO” (li 21) and “ANY” (li 21) conveys L’s light humour and complaint towards her neighbour playing music loudly. As M frequently manages the topic in this conversation, L is a co-operative speaker and holds the floor to lessen the social distance through her anecdotes, “I have this neighbour…” (li 9). L also tends to invite M back into the conversation through the interjection “You know that song?” (li 16) to meet the other’s positive face needs. I like this paragraph – well done!

The primary function of this text is to build rapport through detailing information of L’s neighbour, and current living situation and entertainment through anecdotes. This can be seen through the referral to musical lexemes to indicate the semantic field of music, “equipment” (li 5)” and “headphones” (li 6), creates coherence in the speech. How? Try to be as specific as possible. When the semantic field switches to one of L’s neighbours, the function of entertainment occurs as L recalls her anecdote surrounding her neighbour playing a song loudly every weekend. Lexical terms and phrases such as “adjoining apartments” (li 10) and referral to a “neighbour” (li 9) or “neighbours” (li 6) support the semantic field of housing and apartments. It’s excellent how you follow the development of the text; that shows that you’re really engaging with it. I think if you’re going to have a paragraph devoted to the function, though, that there’s more to be said. How do some of the other subsystems contribute to the function of building rapport?

To build further upon their friendship, a slightly informal register is maintained in the conversation of the interlocutors. It is stated that the pair are friends, however they do not share great intimacy or familiarity with each other and slight planning in their conversation is required. This is shown through the repetition of speech by both interlocutors, “but, but” (li 3), “Well, well” (li 5) and the informal discourse particles “yeah yeah yeah… yeah” (li 14), which show that speakers require more time to think about their speech whilst holding the floor. This is really good analysis and would be favourably looked upon, I think – particularly considering you’re clearly confident enough to go against what the introduction says based on linguistic evidence. I reckon that’s great – and I totally agree with you on this point. False starts and repairs also frequent the conversation, “who who’s that, what” (li 12) and the repetition in “I, I guess” (li 20) demonstrates the spontaneity of the text and informal register of the text. The presence of the interjections “Oh man” (li 9) and “Oh my God” (li 14) also contribute to the informality of the conversation by expressing emotions to each other creating familiarity and intimacy. And also just because those particular lexemes are pretty slangy.

This is a nicely written piece; you’re clearly an effective writer. Straight off the bat, you’ve used a really interesting structure. I personally prefer dividing the analytical commentary by sub-system (so like, a paragraph on syntactic features, then a paragraph on phonological features, and so on). If nothing else, I find it much easier to write that way – and I also think it’s considerably easier to follow. But that’s just personal preference.

You’ve included really good examples (particularly given that the provided text is quite short), and linguistic features have been well identified. I know you’ve structured your paragraphs by theme (social distance/face, social purpose, primary function, register), but I’d try to make more explicit references to the subsystems if possible.

Overall, really nice job!

[syubi]

Hey, syubi!

Congratulations for being the first one to contribute.

(Image removed from quote.)

My comments attached in the quote (in red). Nice job!

Thanks so much for the feedback!! I'll be going back to it and fix up some of the things you mentioned.  I haven't tried writing a commentary using a subsystem each paragraph, but maybe I'll try practicing that soon?

Also! I have another question. Is there a cultural context in this text? My teacher always wants us to pick out the cultural context relating to the Australian culture, but it's always difficult to pin point it. :/

[cookiedream]

Can we write just an intro and paragraph?
Really can't find the time to write up a whole piece

[Joseph41]

Can we write just an intro and paragraph?
Really can't find the time to write up a whole piece

Go for it!

[cookiedream]

Here's my intro and para 1 ^^
_____________________________________

This text is an informal, spoken conversation between two friends, M and L,  with the semantic field of housing. The primary function is for M to inquire about L's situation at home and for L to respond and provide this information, with a secondary phatic function. The social purpose is to build rapport between M and L.

The informative, responsive and phatic functions, as well as the social purpose of building rapport, is demonstrated by myriad linguistic choices of L and M. Interrogatives like "Do you live in a house or an apartment?" (line 1) allows M to discover about L's form of domestic living, supporting his primary purpose. With the abundance of declaratives such as "I live in an apartment" (line 2), L is able to state and exchange facts about his housing to M, facilitating his primary function of informing M. The consistent use of lexemes under the semantic field of housing, such as the common nouns "house" (1) and  "apartment" (4), allows the two friends' conversation to sustain, helping L and M achieve their main purposes. In addition, prosodic features in this conversation helps reinforce this light-heartedness of L and M's exchange, supporting the phatic function and helps in building rapport. For instance, by invoking emphatic stress on the subordinate clause "I'm afraid" in "I'm afraid I do" (line 17), M emphasises his disapproval of the song 'Relax'. In addition, the increase in volume in the intensifier "so" in "But it's SO annoying" (line 21) lets L to further intensify his detestation of the song and how irritating he perceives it to be.

[Joseph41]

Here's my intro and para 1 ^^
_____________________________________

Feedback below in red. Well done!

This text is an informal, spoken conversation True, but what you're analysing is a written representation. I always used to say something like, "This text is a written transcript of a spoken conversation between..." The reason is that written transcripts never quite capture the actual conversation, no matter how detailed they are. between two friends, M and L, [color=red[I'd possibly specify the actual names here to being with - so Michael (L) and Lori (L)[/color] with the semantic field of housing. And neighbours? The primary function is for M to inquire about L's situation at home and for L to respond and provide this information, with a secondary phatic function. The social purpose is to build rapport between M and L. Great. Overall, a solid introductory paragraph. There was very limited context provided in the document, so you were confined a little in terms of what you could say. My go-to end sentence of the introduction was something like, "The [function/social purpose/register] of the text is reflected by a number of sub-systems, including [whatever sub-systems you're discussing]."

The informative, responsive and phatic functions, as well as the social purpose of building rapport, is are demonstrated by myriad This is a nice word, but it feels a little strong to me - particularly for a relatively short text. Consider re-wording. linguistic choices of L and M. Interrogatives like "Do you live in a house or an apartment?" (line 1) allows M to discover about L's form of domestic living, supporting his primary purpose. I agree, but how so? With the abundance of declaratives such as "I live in an apartment" (line 2), L is able to state and exchange facts about his I don't think gender was defined anywhere housing to M, facilitating his primary function of informing M. The consistent use of lexemes under the semantic field of housing, such as the common nouns "house" (1) and "apartment" (4), allows the two friends' conversation to sustain, helping L and M achieve their main purposes. In addition, prosodic features in this conversation helps reinforce this light-heartedness of L and M's exchange, supporting the phatic function and helps in building helping build rapport. For instance, by invoking emphatic stress on the subordinate clause "I'm afraid" in "I'm afraid I do" (line 17), M emphasises his disapproval of the song 'Relax'. In addition, the increase in volume in the intensifier "so" in "But it's SO annoying" (line 21) lets L to further intensify his detestation of the song and how irritating he perceives it to be. Indeed! I'd be interested to hear your next paragraphs if ever you get the chance!