FREE lectures this September + October | HSC Head Start + Exam Revision: book here | QCE Head Start: book here | VCE Exam Revision: book here

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

September 21, 2019, 03:13:08 pm

Author Topic: English Language essay submission and marking  (Read 101488 times)  Share 

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Isabella.ritchie

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Respect: 0
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #270 on: October 28, 2017, 11:53:57 pm »
0
Hi I was wondering if you could possibly correct this essay on the 2015 question 8 essay topic. This would be much appreciated, thank you.

‘Language choices and strategies are frequently based on addressing the face needs of ourselves and others.’ Discuss, referring to at least two subsystems of language in your response.

People choose to use different language for a number of different reasons, but one of the main factors in language choice is addressing the face needs of others. This is done by strategically using language which addresses the positive and negative face needs of others by making them feel good or imposing less upon them. Face needs can be met through using euphemistic language, playful or figurative language or using more political correct terminology. Through these language choices these help to strategically make others feel better and imposing upon them less.

Euphemisms are often used as a strategy to make one feel less bad as they help to cover up the truth and protect one’s positive face needs.  This strategy is often seen in advertisements which sell products associated with taboo topics or topics which people feel uncomfortable discussing. This is evident in the Toto’s bidet commercial where a faux spokesman with a hose is seen  wandering around his home spraying things that could be euphemisms for your bottom such as a pirate's booty, a poster of Uranus and a full moon. By using such euphemisms in a national advertisement it reduces the taboo of topic and makes people feel less imposed upon by this topic and thus address their negative face needs. Euphemisms can also be used to address positive face needs. This can be seen with the euphemistic phrase ‘casting couch’ which has been used for decades in Hollywood. In the light of the recent Harvey Weinstein sexual assault cases, it has been made clear that this phrase is really just a euphemistic strategy. This term prevented the public from really seeing what was really happening behind the scenes as it’s catchy alliteration made people focus more on the location and furniture than the act and sexual assault. This helped to protect the positive face needs of the movie companies and the positive face of young aspiring actors as their dreams of making it in ‘tinsel’ town weren’t tarnished by the reality of the industry. Therefore euphemisms can be used as a strategy in addressing others face needs by not imposing on them and masking the trust in order to make other feel better.

Figurative and playful language can also be used as an effective strategy in helping to not impose on others. This is often seen through metaphors, alliteration or rhyming slang which helps to hedge area the issue. This is becoming a popular strategy in addressing negative face needs on wedding or birthday invitations when asking for money instead of gifts. For examples metaphoric phrases such as ‘wishing well’ which uses alliteration and rhyming sentences such as “to save you shopping, looking or buying, a gift of currency will help you stop trying”. From these examples it is evident that linguistic strategies have been used to hedge around the direct asking for money as alternate phrases such as ‘wishing well’ and ‘gift of currency’ have been substituted in inplace of ‘money’ in a fun rhyming way which reduces imposing of the person receiving the letter.  The idea of rhyming slang being used as a face strategy is also used by businesses or companies when addressing consumers, as seen by the brand M&S replying with “'Sorry your brogues have been rogues and don't fit like they oughtta” to a customer who was unsatisfied with a pair of shoes, where the ‘-gues’ in ‘brogues’ and ‘rogues’ rhyme in order to create make the company seem more accommodating and friendly and help to make the customer feel less angry and thus build the positive face needs of the customer and the M&S brand. Thus showing that rhyming, alliteration and figurative language can be used to make situation more light and help to address both positive and negative face needs.

Furthermore, another strategy commonly used to address positive face needs is the use of politically correct language. Politically correct language helps to reduce marginalising, stereotyping and downgrading people or minority groups.  This strategy is often used with people with specific disabilities, as it is important to use politically correct language in order to address their positive face needs and to not offend them. For example on the ABC program ‘You can’t ask that’, the topic of small statured people was discussed and what the politically correct terminology was when referring to them. For example terms such as midget and dwarf are offensive to people with this genetic disorder as they relate back to them historically being used as carnival folk and freak shows and being involved with the highly offensive act of ‘dwarf throwing’. Therefore in order to address people with this disorder’s positive face needs and reduce objectifying them, the politcal correct term like ‘small statured people’ are used in Australia, because like comedian Stephen K Amos quotes “to think before offending people”. The strategy of politcal correct language can also be seen in Google’s recent changes to some of their dictionary sample sentences that were sexist and challenged the positive face needs of women. For example words like ‘nagging’, ‘presumptuous’ and ‘whinge’ were changed such as  the definition of ‘whinge’ was changed from  “she let off steam by having a good whinge” to “stop whingeing and get on with it!”. These changes help to remove the female association from the negatively connoted words and reduce reinforcing prejudices against women and therefore attend to females positive face needs by not offending them by these old fashioned stereotypes.

Therefore there are numerous ways in which our choices and strategies are frequently used to address both positive and negative face needs. As figurative, political correct language and euphemisms are all linguistic strategies which we use to avoid offending and imposing on people and addressing their face needs.






eru

  • Victorian
  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • Respect: +3
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #271 on: October 29, 2017, 04:16:53 pm »
+5
Hi I was wondering if you could possibly correct this essay on the 2015 question 8 essay topic. This would be much appreciated, thank you.

‘Language choices and strategies are frequently based on addressing the face needs of ourselves and others.’ Discuss, referring to at least two subsystems of language in your response.

People choose to use different language (could you be more specific here? Perhaps try ‘Linguistic features’)  for a number of different (you’ve used different twice so look for a synonym) reasons, but one of the main factors in language choice is addressing the face needs of others. This is done by strategically using language which addresses the positive and negative face needs of others by making them feel good (I think you could be more specific here. Does it make them feel respected? Appreciated?) or imposing less upon them. Face needs can be met through using euphemistic language, playful or figurative language or using more political correct terminology. Through these language choices these help to strategically make others feel better and imposing upon them less. (You’ve repeated ‘imposing on them less’ twice so rephrase the idea)

Euphemisms are often used as a strategy to make one feel less bad (again, you could be more specific by replacing the word ‘bad’ with something else) as they help to cover up the truth and protect one’s positive face needs. This strategy is often seen in advertisements which sell products (advertisements don’t sell products though? They promote them) associated with taboo topics or topics which people feel uncomfortable discussing. This is evident in the Toto’s bidet commercial where a faux spokesman with a hose is seen wandering around his home spraying things that could be euphemisms for your bottom such as a pirate's booty, a poster of Uranus and a full moon. (You should quote each example e.g. ‘pirate’s booty’, ‘full moon’) By using such euphemisms in a national advertisement, it reduces the taboo (nature) of (the) topic (you’ve haven’t said what the taboo topic is) and makes people feel less imposed upon by this topic and thus address their negative face needs. (After reading the topic sentence I was expecting you to discuss only pos face, so mention neg face in the topic sentence as well) Euphemisms can also be used to address positive face needs. This can be seen with the euphemistic phrase ‘casting couch’ which has been used for decades in Hollywood. In the light of the recent Harvey Weinstein sexual assault cases, it has been made clear that this phrase is really just a euphemistic strategy. (‘really just’ sounds too informal here) This term prevented the public from really seeing what was really happening behind the scenes as it’s catchy alliteration made people focus more on the location and furniture than the act and sexual assault. This helped to protect the positive face needs of the movie companies (be specific – the face needs of the employees of the movie companies) and the positive face of young aspiring actors as their dreams of making it in ‘tinsel’ town weren’t tarnished by the reality of the industry. (I don’t think this is the strongest example you could’ve used for positive face. What about nicknames? Swearing between friends?) euphemisms can be used as a strategy in addressing others face needs by not imposing on them and masking the trust (did you mean truth?) in order to make other feel better.

Figurative and playful language can also be used as an effective strategy in helping to not impose on others. This is often seen through metaphors, alliteration or rhyming slang which helps to hedge area the issue. This is becoming a popular strategy in addressing negative face needs on wedding or birthday invitations when asking for money instead of gifts. For examples metaphoric phrases such as ‘wishing well’ which uses alliteration and rhyming sentences such as “to save you shopping, looking or buying, a gift of currency will help you stop trying”. From these examples it is evident that linguistic strategies have been used to hedge around the direct asking for money as alternate phrases such as ‘wishing well’ and ‘gift of currency’ have been substituted in inplace of ‘money’ in a fun rhyming way which reduces imposing of the person receiving the letter. (‘which reduces imposing of the person…’ sounds awkward so rephrase it) The idea of rhyming slang being used as a face strategy is also used by businesses or companies when addressing consumers, as seen by the brand M&S replying with “'Sorry your brogues have been rogues and don't fit like they oughtta” to a customer who was unsatisfied with a pair of shoes, where the ‘-gues’ in ‘brogues’ and ‘rogues’ rhyme in order to create make the company seem more accommodating and friendly and help to make the customer feel less angry and thus build the positive face needs (positive face needs can’t be built, they can only be met or not met) of the customer and the M&S brand. (This sentence is too long so split your ideas into shorter sentences. You could be more specific in your elaboration. How does making a customer less angry make them feel respected? ) Thus showing that rhyming, alliteration and figurative language can be used to make situation more light and help to address both positive and negative face needs.

Your topic sentence only mentions negative face needs, even though you’ve discussed pos face as well. Make sure your topic sentence matches with the contents of your body paragraph.

Furthermore, another strategy commonly used to address positive face needs is the use of politically correct language. Politically correct language helps to reduce marginalising, stereotyping and downgrading people or minority groups.  This strategy is often used with people with specific disabilities, as it is important to use politically correct language in order to address their positive face needs and to not offend them. For example on the ABC program ‘You can’t ask that’, the topic of small statured people was discussed and what the politically correct terminology was when referring to them. (awkward expression, try: ..statured people and politically correct terminology were discussed. Try to be consise in your writing) For example terms such as midget and dwarf (again, put your examples in quotes) are offensive to people with this genetic disorder as they relate back to them historically being used as carnival folk and freak shows and being involved with the highly offensive act of ‘dwarf throwing’. Therefore in order to address people with this disorder’s positive face needs (awkward expression, try: the positive face needs of individuals with this disorder)  and reduce objectifying them (reduce objectifying them sounds awkward), the politcal correct term like (you don’t need to say ‘like’ here as you're not listing multiple examples) ‘small statured people’ are used in Australia, because like comedian Stephen K Amos quotes “to think before offending people”. (‘like’ is unnecessary here; I think there are better quotes you can use to support this example. Try to find a quote from a linguist) The strategy (strategic use) of political(ly) correct language can also be seen in Google’s recent changes to some of their dictionary sample sentences that were sexist and challenged the positive face needs of women. For example words (my year 11 EL teacher roasted us if we ever used ‘word’ in an essay, b/c you could use ‘lexeme’ instead and add more metalang to your essay) like ‘nagging’, ‘presumptuous’ and ‘whinge’ were changed such as (‘such as’ should be replaced with ‘and’ so your sentence flows better) the definition of ‘whinge’ was changed from  “she let off steam by having a good whinge” to “stop whingeing and get on with it!”. These changes help to remove the female association from the negatively connoted words and reduce reinforcing (I’ve noticed you do this a lot in your writing, but it doesn’t make sense. You don’t need two verbs, so just write ‘reduce prejudices’) prejudices against women and therefore attend to females positive face needs by not offending them by these old fashioned stereotypes. (Don’t forget the linking sentence!)

Therefore there are numerous ways in which our choices and strategies are frequently used to address both positive and negative face needs. As figurative, political(ly) correct language and euphemisms are all linguistic strategies which we use to avoid offending and imposing on people and addressing their face needs.

Solid work here, however you could’ve explored other ideas in this essay to add more depth. For example, you could’ve linked the idea of social distance to face needs, and how the power disparity between interlocutors affects language choices. You could also use more quotes to improve your essay. Regarding your written expression, read your work out loud after you finish it to see which parts sound awkward. Obviously don't do this during the exam haha, but I'm sure that proofreading and practice will help! Good luck :)


exit

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 432
  • COALESCE
  • Respect: +34
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #272 on: October 30, 2017, 11:40:00 pm »
0
Here is an Analytical commentary in the midst of many essays. Sorry if it's bad but I guess the text wasn't great either?

This is a predominately formal written discourse by the Darebin government, published as a media release, for its local communities. It seeks to inform Darebin residents of their ‘Love Living Local’ initiative that is aimed to optimise efficiency within the local community, which benefits many different aspects of a person’s life. There is, from this, a social purpose for the Darebin government to garner support from the local community, and portray the ‘Love Living Local’ program in positive light.

The Darebin government informs  the community of the various aspects of their new program that they are implementing. The government highlights the benefits of the program through listing in ‘going to the hairdresser, studying playing…and much more’ (9) and parallelism in ‘The Darebin staff will work…  They will do this…’ (33-36). Here, listing highlights and accentuates concisely and with starkness the extensive benefits of the program, garnering their support. In combination with the parallelism containing high modality verbs ‘will’ (33,34) to assure the reader of the unrelenting dedication the government is providing to the program, the function of informing the reader of the new ‘Love Living Local’ program in positive light is fulfilled.  Additionally, the alliteration on ‘Love Living Local’ (17) accentuates and makes memorable the name of the program, which provides it with peculiar significance. This ensures that the reader will continue to support the program. Noun phrases such as ‘local economic activity’ (15) and ‘sustainable transport modes’ also provide weight and detail to the explanation of benefits of the program. This ensures that the benefits of the program are clear to the reader, fostering their support.

The predominately formal nature of the text attributes authority and expertise to the Darebin government. The informality is reflected in the colloquial metaphor ‘own backyard’ (6-7), which where the possessive pronoun ‘own’ makes the benefits of the program personal and directly relatable to the reader. It also exaggerates the convenience the program brings to the reader, further elevating the reader’s opinion of it. However, the formality is achieved through proper nouns such as ‘The City of Darebin’ (3), and ‘ Cr Marlene Kairouz’. These bring a sense of authority and professionalism to the media release, which reflects how the government wishes to be perceived. Complex sentences such as ‘Love Living Local…that…by helping them…backyard’ (5-7) with adverbials provide elaborate detail about the ideas and goals of the ‘Love Living Local program’ and thus fulfils the function of informing the reader clearly about the benefits of the program, while contributing to the formality.

The cohesion and coherence ensure that the benefits of the government’s initiative is clear to the reader. Coherence is achieved through particularly short paragraphs such as from 13-14 and 15-16. This can be attributed to the brevity of the discourse, where the government desires to convey the positives of their program with unremitting bleakness. From this, the paragraphs display a logical progression of ideas, and facilitate topic shifts such as when the topic shifts from positives about the program on lines 15-16 to the inimitability of it in lines 17-18. Additionally, cohesion is achieved through front focus ellipsis on such as on line 48 ‘A home delivery service for the Preston Market’ (48). Here, particular emphasis is drawn to the particular benefits of the program. Substitution in the form of anaphora in ‘them’ (6) also achieves cohesion, as the writer omits unnecessary information such as when it is already known that ‘them’ refers to Darebin residents.

« Last Edit: October 31, 2017, 12:44:58 am by exit »
VCE [ATAR: 99.25]: Physics 1/2, English 1/2, EngLang,Methods, Spesh, Accounting, Chem, German

2018-2021: Bachelor Of Commerce @ University of Melbourne - Melbourne National Merit Scholarship
VCE English Language: A+ Short Answer Guide[pm for extra guidance!]

mgoulding16

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: 0
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #273 on: October 31, 2017, 07:41:11 pm »
0
If someone could mark this, would be much appreciated! scores are helpful. I know I'm terrible so helpful advice is great

‘Australian English is inventive and playful, and reflects our national identity.’ To what extent do you agree? Refer to at least two subsystems in your response.

Our national identity can be inferred and is reflected in the language that our people use everyday. There are many varieties of Australian English, some of which are inventive and playful, which reflect certain values held by Australians. Colloquial Australian English is one of these varieties, which provides the opportunity to create lexemes, reestablish semantics and reflect the identity of the people who speak it. Despite this variety being prominent within certain contexts, Standard Australian English is less inventive and playful, as it’s required to serve different purposes within different contexts. Whilst some varieties of Australian English are most certainly easily changed, they do not all reflect our identity to the same extent.

Colloquial Australian English is an accepting and adapting platforms to new lexemes, as well as the broadening and shifting of semantics of pre-existing words. In the 21st century, Australian English has grown to be a much more dominant influence on Globlish with the establishment of the 2015 word of the year “selfie”, which is still predominant within the 2017 cultural context as well. Phrases which are common to everyday Australians such as “no worries”  and “too easy”, are not as obvious to individuals who have not grown up with their whole life, such as Ian Rose. These phrase reflect the easy going nature, and optimistic outlook on life which many Australian’s uphold. This key feature identifies us to many other nations, and so it is clear that our language is intrinsically linked, and reflects our national identity. Individuals within our society perpetuate this language through platforms such as radio and television. Fitzy and Wippa, radio presenters for Nova 96.9, present themselves as broad accented Australians which links to the values of their targeted audiences: tough love, humble and direct. Fitzy and Wippa appeal to our national patriotism and identity through the use of their diminutive, inventive terms of address, and their parodies, most recently “Tom is a bin chook ”. Bin Chook is an Australian Colloquialism for the Australian White Ibis, and has also broadened, as shown in this video, to describe an annoying person, synonymous with “moocher” or “scab”. Tom is the producer of the show, and so to insult a person in authority, whilst in many other national contexts would be considered inappropriate, the positive response reflects Australia's value of egalitarianism and dismissal of power. These examples show that as well as being inventive and playful, our language reflects certain values of our society, and in turn our national identity.

Australian English however is not limited to colloquial varieties. The influx of people from different countries, and the language they bring with them, has caused the creation of a number of ethnolects. These ethnolects are crucial in expressing a cultural heritage as well as their Australian identity, and the establishment of these proves the playful and inventive nature of all Australians. For example the word “halal” is now used more often than ever, after a sharp increase in 2010, coinciding with a huge influx of immigration from Middle Eastern countries, with the threat of persecution by ISIS. The adoption of this word into our Australian society is seen through the trending meal “Halal Snack Pack” which has even be seen in parliament used by Pauline Hanson in 2016. This acceptance of words into English, and use of them in slang descriptions such as about females “Oh she’s halal” an expression overheard on the bus I catch, shows that Standard English is not enough for these individuals to identify as Australians, and that their cultural heritage as well as their newly founded identity can be merged together within Australia’s cultural context. This inventiveness displayed by Australians reflects their identity as both immigrants and Australian through their language.

Whilst the discussed varieties are important in displaying social, cultural and national identity, they are informal varieties, which are not suited to all contexts, in particular news delivery or any situation where there is no room for miscommunication. The Standard of Australian English is associated with education, wealth and power, and hence fulfills the overt needs of our society. The Standard can be understood by the general public, hence avoiding discrimination to anyone. Standard English  was used in the Thunder River Rapids disaster at DreamWorld in October 2016, its purpose being to ensure there was no miscommunication to the audience which was in this case the general public. The use of the phrase “injuries were incompatible with life” is euphemistic and contrasts to the direct language discussed before. This shows the realisation by Australians for the different language requirements within different contexts, as well as displaying that not all varieties of Australian English need to be inventive and playful in order to demonstrate our national identity. Most Australians can understand the standard, which provides national group identity, with as limited exclusion as possible. Though not creative, and stemmed from two other national standards, British and American, Australian Standard English is still a crucial variety in establishing our national identity.

The number of varieties which come under the heading Australian English are each unique and contribute to the overall Australian national identity. Ethnolects and colloquial australian English are shown to be inventive and playful, and not only work in establishing our national identity, but our cultural and social identity as well. Standard Australian English, whilst not as creative, allows us to further perpetuate our values of egalitarianism, and makes it a crucial variety in our society. Whilst contributing in different capacities and to different components of our national identity, these varieties are all equally important in order to serve the communicative functions and contexts our Australian society presents us with.

areeba.bashar

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Respect: 0
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #274 on: October 31, 2017, 08:53:08 pm »
0
Hi! I would greatly appreciate some feedback to my essay (VCAA 2001)! Thank you very much in advance :)


Language plays a powerful role in both contributing to and in eliminating discrimination. In what ways does language both contribute to and eliminate discrimination?
The dyadic relationship between language and social attitudes demonstrates that although our social stance dictates our discourse, language, as a melting pot of heterogeneous experiences, reflects the instilled biases, judgements and discriminations of a collective society. Discrimination permeates within societal discourse; it is reflected in the social inequalities present in marginalised groups such as asylum seekers, women, as well as religious minorities. The conscious awareness of such inherent power dynamics solidifies that discrimination oozes from the views and values of society, commonly without realisation. However, language and its multiplicity of purposes enables the challenging of discriminatory conventions that are often normalised within society. It is through such mitigated language that discrimination and its underlying roots within society can be addressed.
 
The commodification of asylum seekers as entities that are seemingly below human value indicates that discrimination thrives within the prejudiced discourse of some. This notion is typified through former Prime Minister Julia Gillard, who refers to "processing asylum seekers". The dehumanising connotations that is present in the active verb "processing" presents asylum seekers as almost inanimate objects, disregarding the sanctity of human life. Similarly, Immigration Minister Peter Dutton's declares that the acceptance of asylum seekers causes Australia "more debt". The comparative element that the determiner "more" instils suggests that asylum seekers are only viewed from an economic lens. The reduction of asylum seekers from humans to causes of economic hardship invokes the notion that money is intrinsically more important than human life, which is subsequently threatening to the positive face needs of asylum seekers as they are ostensibly aware of their own diminished value. The devolved status of asylum seekers within the eyes of some is further ratified through the Herald Sun's usage of the verb phrase "flooding in" to describe asylum seeker movement into Australia. The loss of individuality that the verb phrase induces imbues an image of an asylum seeker collective possessing no resonance of an identity or a voice, thus dehumanising them. Further, the very title of the collocative noun phrase "asylum seeker", in which the pre-modifier "asylum" restricts the perception of asylum seekers as those predominantly seeking asylum. The depletion of a multi-faceted experience through the shunning, definitive connotations of "asylum seeker" inhibits one from being perceived as a diasporic amalgamation of identities. The blatant disregard for the sanctity of human life, crystallised through the dehumanising portrayal of asylum seekers in current societies exemplifies that whilst such prejudices and biased attitudes exist within society, discrimination will prevail.

The dichotomy between man and woman, although blurred by the growing understanding of the intricacies of gender and sexual identity are faced with the obstacles of face-threatening misunderstandings, exposing that discrimination is deeply entrenched in everyday discourse. The rampant stereotypes of men embodying inherently masculine traits such as "assertive", "competitive" and "dominant" presents such attributes as infused with a phallocentric  quality. Conversely, for job listings targeted at women, the listings often involved more subtle qualities such as the ability to "analyse", "determine" and "understand", epitomising women as possessing more refined, yet less powerful qualities than their male counterpart. Similarly, the specification of genders though pre-modifiers that supposedly oppose the conventional occupation demographic such as "lady doctor" insinuates that doctors are predominantly a male-dominated occupation. Moreover, the traditional patriarchal hegemony that is pertinent in society is reflected in Bill Heffernan criticising Julia Gillard's leadership abilities on the basis of her "barren womb". The absurdity of infertility correlating with leadership qualities exposes the outdated notion that women are divested of any power on the basis of being female, ratifying his discriminatory attitude. Emma Watson, in her UN speech, discerns that "women choose not to identify with feminists… expressions seem as too strong, too aggressive …. Unattractive, even." The repudiation of feminine archetypes of submission through embracing the "definition of feminism" is presented as unattractive, as the equating of the power position between man and woman is considered reproachable by many. Whilst Watson acknowledges the role that discrimination plays in inhibiting gender equality, she extolls that the essence of feminism does not lie at the "word [feminism]", but rather the "idea and ambition behind it". Watson directly challenges discrimination through defining feminism as the belief of "equal rights and opportunities", eradicating the possibility of conflating its definition to its connotation: "man hating". Through articulating that discrimination lies at the crux of this misunderstanding, Watson simultaneously presents language as a vehicle that facilitates the complex beliefs and values of a society. The ostensible assertion that language, despite its irrefutable power, may not be able to encapsulate the brevity of human experience suggests that in order to remove discrimination from discourse, it ultimately must be removed from societal views and values, which possess the capacity to transcend the extensive scope of language.

The opposition and support towards religious minorities such as Islam within contemporary society shows the dual nature of language to include and alienate. The exclusion of Muslims, established through Pauline Hanson's OneNation policy, in which she defines "Kaffir", a word of Arabic origin, as "any non-Muslim (us), the lowest rank of being, worthy of contempt, should be ruled over by Muslims." The parenthetical inclusion of the collective first person pronoun "us" instils an us-and-them demarcation that isolates Muslims from non-Muslims, whilst concurrently asserting that one cannot simultaneously be Muslim as well as Australia. Hanson's disregard for the multiplicity of identity crystallises her discriminatory actions towards Muslims, as she fails to understand that identities are inherently multi-faceted, and one can be both Australian and Muslim. Further, by likening Islam to a "disease" and asserting that "Australia needs to vaccinate", Hanson explicitly characterises Islam as pathogenic and toxic, and tacitly asserts that there it is imperative for Muslims to be removed from Australia, suggested from the resolute, mandatory quality that the modal verb "need" imbues. Whilst Hanson’s diatribes of Islam lies on one end of a spectrum, George Brandis’ response to Hansons’ outrageous act of “mocking [Islamic] garments” solidifies that language does intrinsically serve the ability to rectify and challenge discriminatory actions to prevent it from becoming normalised within society. The emphatic stress of the plosive /p/ as Brandis articulates the “appalling” nature of Hanson’s actions enunciates his utter repudiation of the Islamophobic attitude that Hanson embodies. Additionally, Brandis' incorporation of the infinitive verbs "to ridicule…to drive…to mock" exemplifies the continuous nature of Hanson's actions, asserting that Hanson's act of wearing a burqa to Parliament is disrespectful. The standing ovation that Brandis' response elicited reiterates the notion that discrimination originates within the attitudes of individuals. In order for it to be abolished from society, blatant discrimination must be condemned by those who view it to enable that there is an vehement opposition towards discriminatory acts.

Ultimately, language serves the purpose of its users, and is inherently powerful in its facilitative capacity. It is inherently the attitudes, biases and prejudices of individuals that deem the usage of discriminatory language within society. In order to abolish discrimination, one must initially understand that discrimination lies at the basis of hegemonic power structures that are enforced by society. To challenge these structures would establish a society in which discrimination does not exist.

mtDNA

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 152
  • Respect: +47
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #275 on: October 31, 2017, 09:29:03 pm »
+1
Hi! I would greatly appreciate some feedback to my essay (VCAA 2001)! Thank you very much in advance :)


Language plays a powerful role in both contributing to and in eliminating discrimination. In what ways does language both contribute to and eliminate discrimination?
The dyadic relationship between language and social attitudes demonstrates that although our social stance dictates our discourse, language, as a melting pot of heterogeneous experiences, reflects the instilled biases, judgements and discriminations of a collective society. Discrimination permeates within societal discourse; it is reflected in the social inequalities present in marginalised groups such as asylum seekers, women, as well as religious minorities. The conscious awareness of such inherent power dynamics solidifies that discrimination oozes from the views and values of society, commonly without realisation. However, language and its multiplicity of purposes enables the challenging of discriminatory conventions that are often normalised within society. It is through such mitigated language that discrimination and its underlying roots within society can be addressed.
 
The commodification of asylum seekers as entities that are seemingly below human value indicates that discrimination thrives within the prejudiced discourse of some. This notion is typified through former Prime Minister Julia Gillard, who refers to "processing asylum seekers". The dehumanising connotations that is present in the active verb "processing" presents asylum seekers as almost inanimate objects, disregarding the sanctity of human life. Similarly, Immigration Minister Peter Dutton's declares that the acceptance of asylum seekers causes Australia "more debt". The comparative element that the determiner "more" instils suggests that asylum seekers are only viewed from an economic lens. The reduction of asylum seekers from humans to causes of economic hardship invokes the notion that money is intrinsically more important than human life, which is subsequently threatening to the positive face needs of asylum seekers as they are ostensibly aware of their own diminished value. The devolved status of asylum seekers within the eyes of some is further ratified through the Herald Sun's usage of the verb phrase "flooding in" to describe asylum seeker movement into Australia. The loss of individuality that the verb phrase induces imbues an image of an asylum seeker collective possessing no resonance of an identity or a voice, thus dehumanising them. Further, the very title of the collocative noun phrase "asylum seeker", in which the pre-modifier "asylum" restricts the perception of asylum seekers as those predominantly seeking asylum. The depletion of a multi-faceted experience through the shunning, definitive connotations of "asylum seeker" inhibits one from being perceived as a diasporic amalgamation of identities. The blatant disregard for the sanctity of human life, crystallised through the dehumanising portrayal of asylum seekers in current societies exemplifies that whilst such prejudices and biased attitudes exist within society, discrimination will prevail.

The dichotomy between man and woman, although blurred by the growing understanding of the intricacies of gender and sexual identity are faced with the obstacles of face-threatening misunderstandings, exposing that discrimination is deeply entrenched in everyday discourse. The rampant stereotypes of men embodying inherently masculine traits such as "assertive", "competitive" and "dominant" presents such attributes as infused with a phallocentric  quality. Conversely, for job listings targeted at women, the listings often involved more subtle qualities such as the ability to "analyse", "determine" and "understand", epitomising women as possessing more refined, yet less powerful qualities than their male counterpart. Similarly, the specification of genders though pre-modifiers that supposedly oppose the conventional occupation demographic such as "lady doctor" insinuates that doctors are predominantly a male-dominated occupation. Moreover, the traditional patriarchal hegemony that is pertinent in society is reflected in Bill Heffernan criticising Julia Gillard's leadership abilities on the basis of her "barren womb". The absurdity of infertility correlating with leadership qualities exposes the outdated notion that women are divested of any power on the basis of being female, ratifying his discriminatory attitude. Emma Watson, in her UN speech, discerns that "women choose not to identify with feminists… expressions seem as too strong, too aggressive …. Unattractive, even." The repudiation of feminine archetypes of submission through embracing the "definition of feminism" is presented as unattractive, as the equating of the power position between man and woman is considered reproachable by many. Whilst Watson acknowledges the role that discrimination plays in inhibiting gender equality, she extolls that the essence of feminism does not lie at the "word [feminism]", but rather the "idea and ambition behind it". Watson directly challenges discrimination through defining feminism as the belief of "equal rights and opportunities", eradicating the possibility of conflating its definition to its connotation: "man hating". Through articulating that discrimination lies at the crux of this misunderstanding, Watson simultaneously presents language as a vehicle that facilitates the complex beliefs and values of a society. The ostensible assertion that language, despite its irrefutable power, may not be able to encapsulate the brevity of human experience suggests that in order to remove discrimination from discourse, it ultimately must be removed from societal views and values, which possess the capacity to transcend the extensive scope of language.

The opposition and support towards religious minorities such as Islam within contemporary society shows the dual nature of language to include and alienate. The exclusion of Muslims, established through Pauline Hanson's OneNation policy, in which she defines "Kaffir", a word of Arabic origin, as "any non-Muslim (us), the lowest rank of being, worthy of contempt, should be ruled over by Muslims." The parenthetical inclusion of the collective first person pronoun "us" instils an us-and-them demarcation that isolates Muslims from non-Muslims, whilst concurrently asserting that one cannot simultaneously be Muslim as well as Australia. Hanson's disregard for the multiplicity of identity crystallises her discriminatory actions towards Muslims, as she fails to understand that identities are inherently multi-faceted, and one can be both Australian and Muslim. Further, by likening Islam to a "disease" and asserting that "Australia needs to vaccinate", Hanson explicitly characterises Islam as pathogenic and toxic, and tacitly asserts that there it is imperative for Muslims to be removed from Australia, suggested from the resolute, mandatory quality that the modal verb "need" imbues. Whilst Hanson’s diatribes of Islam lies on one end of a spectrum, George Brandis’ response to Hansons’ outrageous act of “mocking [Islamic] garments” solidifies that language does intrinsically serve the ability to rectify and challenge discriminatory actions to prevent it from becoming normalised within society. The emphatic stress of the plosive /p/ as Brandis articulates the “appalling” nature of Hanson’s actions enunciates his utter repudiation of the Islamophobic attitude that Hanson embodies. Additionally, Brandis' incorporation of the infinitive verbs "to ridicule…to drive…to mock" exemplifies the continuous nature of Hanson's actions, asserting that Hanson's act of wearing a burqa to Parliament is disrespectful. The standing ovation that Brandis' response elicited reiterates the notion that discrimination originates within the attitudes of individuals. In order for it to be abolished from society, blatant discrimination must be condemned by those who view it to enable that there is an vehement opposition towards discriminatory acts.

Ultimately, language serves the purpose of its users, and is inherently powerful in its facilitative capacity. It is inherently the attitudes, biases and prejudices of individuals that deem the usage of discriminatory language within society. In order to abolish discrimination, one must initially understand that discrimination lies at the basis of hegemonic power structures that are enforced by society. To challenge these structures would establish a society in which discrimination does not exist.


I don’t have time to correct this in full, but I must say your expression is extremely impressive! However, what stops this essay from being a 15/15 is 1) the lack of linguist quotes and 2) you didn’t address the question properly.

I was planning an essay for this prompt a couple of days ago, and something you must notice is the crux of the prompt: “in what ways does language contribute to and eliminate discrimination”. Your essay gets an A+ for the ‘contribute to’ section, but the 'eliminate’ part was extremely lacking. So the way I’d go about it is doing a general PC language-ish essay, with BP1 being inclusive/exclusive language, BP2 being the use of euphemisms, etc., and within all three BPs discuss how language contributes to AND eliminates discrimination. For instance, euphemisms eliminate discrimination and promote harmony (I won’t explain this since it’s pretty obvious), however, they also contribute to discrimination in certain situations, such as with disability in that it promotes negative stigmatisation to that group (look this up to understand what I’m getting at).

And secondly, you need to have a balance with linguist quotes and contemporary examples (Gillard is way too old to use), otherwise the examiners will mark your piece down.

So in that sense, your language use is fantastic, but if you fail to answer the prompt properly (the mention of elimination at the end of your third body wasn’t sufficient) and don’t strike a balance between quotes and examples, then you are bound to get a low to medium mark for the essay since it shows a lack of understanding (which imo is more important). From what I read, you definitely have the potential to score extremely well in the exam, but don’t let these big mistakes drag you down  :D (hope that helps, and goo luck!)


Tutoring by ATAR Notes - learn more!

99.20 ATAR
Biomedicine @ The University of Melbourne

Year I: BIOL10002 | BIOL10003 | CHEM10006 | PHYC10007 | MAST10016 | MAST10011 | POLS10001 | UNIB20014
Year II: BIOM20001 | BIOM20002 | BCMB20005 | PHRM20001 | EDUC20069 | ITAL10008


ellaoconnell

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Respect: 0
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #276 on: November 02, 2017, 12:20:51 pm »
0
Hi! If anyone would be able to mark this essay for me it would be much appreciated. Thank you!  ;D

"Is anything in language taboo these days?"


The way individuals use language reveals their attitudes towards certain topics. The context, participants and subject matter all influence the way their attitudes can be expressed. Kate Burridge agrees stating that “nothing is taboo for all people, under all circumstances all the time.” Changing any one of these factors requires language use to be reassessed. In many modern contexts, dysphemisms have become acceptable and a clear marker of identity on the other hand the public domain is not as tolerant of dysphemistic or discriminatory language,  and backlash is often received if taboo or offensive language is used. Therefore the context in which taboo language is used needs to be considered in order to choose language appropriately.

In the 21st century the use of taboo topics and discriminatory language is more widely accepted. According to Kate Burridge “When we hear people swear we often assume their word spring from a well of deep meaning.” This is especially true for Australians for whom ‘bloody’ is an important indicator of friendliness and mateship as opposed to ignorance and offence. In Australian actress Cate Blanchett’s Oscar acceptance speech,  she ended with, “don't you fucking forget it.”  This use of the f-word highlights the strong tie swearing has with the Australian identity and does not come across as taboo or offensive as she is Australian. Many comedians make use of explicit language in order to establish and informal setting and relate to the audience.  swearing is used to show that a speaker is just like you, to lessen the social distance and establish a friendly relationship especially with Australians.

Nevertheless, negative opinions toward taboo topics in the public sphere are still around. Where gender, race or sexuality are concerned, dysphemistic language is heavily opposed. A liberal candidate Aaron Lane was forced to resign after old tweets “shirts are for faggots” and “ [Peter Slipper is] a big c***”  surfaced.  He could not deal with the negative backlash and the liberal party did not want a homophobic name for themselves.  this kind of language is definitely still considered taboo. Even when Prince Harry called his friend a ‘raghead’, the media criticized him for using inappropriate language even though Harry meant it in a light-hearted and endearing manner. Sometimes it is not the language which is used but in fact the context that it is used within that determines whether it is considered appropriate or taboo.

Euphemisms are often used in the public domain to reduce the taboo associated with explicit language. For example lexemes under the semantic field of menstruation irregularly labelled is taboo explaining why “vagina”, “uterus” and “pads and tampons”  aren’t usually used in the media or by people with importance to a wide audience. Words like “lady parts” and “sanitary napkins”  are used instead to euphemise and neutralise the topic being spoken about in attempt to reduce taboo and not offend anyone. In an advertisement for a toilet freshener “V.I.POO”, euphemistic language was also used to avoid speaking rashly about smelly defecation. “Punish the porcelain”, “poopulate” and “devil’s donuts”   are just a few of the terms used to soften the action of defecating.  The impact of these two taboo topics is lessened through the use of euphemism to maintain a more formal and serious discourse when needing to talk about embarrassing personal matters.

Although dysphemisms and swearing are mostly acceptable in the Australian context, certain topics are still considered taboo.  Inappropriate language in the public domain regarding individual identity is or private matters can be highly criticised depending on the context and the audience. Therefore there are definitely aspects of language which are still considered taboo in today's day and age.
2016: Psych [40]
2017: Methods, Chemistry, Physics, English Language, Health and Human Development

mtDNA

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 152
  • Respect: +47
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #277 on: November 02, 2017, 01:32:16 pm »
+2
Hi! If anyone would be able to mark this essay for me it would be much appreciated. Thank you!  ;D

"Is anything in language taboo these days?"


The way individuals use language reveals their attitudes towards certain topics. The context, participants and subject matter all influence the way their attitudes can be expressed. Kate Burridge agrees stating that “nothing is taboo for all people, under all circumstances all the time.” Changing any one of these factors requires language use to be reassessed. In many modern contexts, dysphemisms have become acceptable and a clear marker of identity on the other hand the public domain is not as tolerant of dysphemistic or discriminatory language,  and backlash is often received if taboo or offensive language is used. Therefore the context in which taboo language is used needs to be considered in order to choose language appropriately.

In the 21st century the use of taboo topics and discriminatory language is more widely accepted. According to Kate Burridge “When we hear people swear we often assume their word spring from a well of deep meaning.” This is especially true for Australians for whom ‘bloody’ is an important indicator of friendliness and mateship as opposed to ignorance and offence. In Australian actress Cate Blanchett’s Oscar acceptance speech,  she ended with, “don't you fucking forget it.”  This use of the f-word highlights the strong tie swearing has with the Australian identity and does not come across as taboo or offensive as she is Australian. Many comedians make use of explicit language in order to establish and informal setting and relate to the audience.  swearing is used to show that a speaker is just like you, to lessen the social distance and establish a friendly relationship especially with Australians.

Nevertheless, negative opinions toward taboo topics in the public sphere are still around. Where gender, race or sexuality are concerned, dysphemistic language is heavily opposed. A liberal candidate Aaron Lane was forced to resign after old tweets “shirts are for faggots” and “ [Peter Slipper is] a big c***”  surfaced.  He could not deal with the negative backlash and the liberal party did not want a homophobic name for themselves.  this kind of language is definitely still considered taboo. Even when Prince Harry called his friend a ‘raghead’, the media criticized him for using inappropriate language even though Harry meant it in a light-hearted and endearing manner. Sometimes it is not the language which is used but in fact the context that it is used within that determines whether it is considered appropriate or taboo.

Euphemisms are often used in the public domain to reduce the taboo associated with explicit language. For example lexemes under the semantic field of menstruation irregularly labelled is taboo explaining why “vagina”, “uterus” and “pads and tampons”  aren’t usually used in the media or by people with importance to a wide audience. Words like “lady parts” and “sanitary napkins”  are used instead to euphemise and neutralise the topic being spoken about in attempt to reduce taboo and not offend anyone. In an advertisement for a toilet freshener “V.I.POO”, euphemistic language was also used to avoid speaking rashly about smelly defecation. “Punish the porcelain”, “poopulate” and “devil’s donuts”   are just a few of the terms used to soften the action of defecating.  The impact of these two taboo topics is lessened through the use of euphemism to maintain a more formal and serious discourse when needing to talk about embarrassing personal matters.

Although dysphemisms and swearing are mostly acceptable in the Australian context, certain topics are still considered taboo.  Inappropriate language in the public domain regarding individual identity is or private matters can be highly criticised depending on the context and the audience. Therefore there are definitely aspects of language which are still considered taboo in today's day and age.


Just really quickly: I would say this is a low/medium, to improve:
- Use contemporary examples (some I saw dated back to 2014 and 2009, which is extremely ancient)
- (most importantly) You need to address the question in more detail - “Is anything taboo these days”. So atm your paragraphs are really superficial, and I think you need to explore the ideas in a greater depth. For instance, you link the BP1 to Australian identity, and use that as a mechanism to explain why dysphemistic is not considered a taboo in contemporary Australian society. So focus on WHY something is and isn’t a taboo, since you end goal is to explain that taboo is dependent on xyz, so everything these days in not considered taboo. 
- You need to fix your punctuation and grammar, since there are mistakes here and there


Tutoring by ATAR Notes - learn more!

99.20 ATAR
Biomedicine @ The University of Melbourne

Year I: BIOL10002 | BIOL10003 | CHEM10006 | PHYC10007 | MAST10016 | MAST10011 | POLS10001 | UNIB20014
Year II: BIOM20001 | BIOM20002 | BCMB20005 | PHRM20001 | EDUC20069 | ITAL10008


biancawang

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Respect: 0
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #278 on: November 03, 2017, 08:43:15 pm »
0
Hi!! I have a shocking English language teacher + am absolutely praying for a 30 raw at this point. I would love some brutally honest feedback and rough score out of 15, thank you!

‘Our Australian identity is closely tied to our use of English, which is rich, complex and dynamic’


There is no doubt that language choices depicts one’s identity. More specifically, the Australian identity, is greatly reflected through the use of Australian English, a variety that is unique, complex and constantly changing. Lexical innovation promotes the idea that our English is not only rich, but our national identity is continuously expressed through new slang, and our retained colloquial expressions. Additionally, the Australian accent, one of the most noticeable across the globe, is renown for reflecting national values such as egalitarianism and a fair go. Over time, the vast influence of other varieties is evident in increasing the richness and complexity of Australian English. However, some societal attitudes can question the degree to which these influences have molded our language use and identity for the better. But, these views are limited to an extent, as it must be recognised that these varieties are responsible for the diverse nature of our English and as a result, play a role in shaping our diverse national identity.

Lexical choices used in Australian society today, is an indicator of cultural values and beliefs. Australian colloquialisms, for example, praised by Phillip Hensher to be “the most inventive in the world”, are indicators of the easy going, down to earth personality of most Australians. The widely used shortening “g’day”, term of address “mate” and diminutives “bottle-o”, “servo” and “rego” reflect the casual tone of Australian speakers, who enjoy using informal slang to promote solidarity and ingroup membership. More so, Kate Burridge states that the term “bloody” has now “become an important indicator of Australianess and of cultural values such as friendliness, informality, laid-backness [and] mateship”. An advert released earlier this year by Four’N Twenty, uses many features of language that pushes the boundaries of Standard, to connect with the Australian audience. Colloquial expressions such as “fair dinkum” and “give it a crack” are used to seek a connection with it’s viewers. This is further exemplified through the non-Standard use of “you’s”, a lexeme that’s used in Australia more than any other country, incorrect grammatical structure and pronoun use seen in “me and me mates”, and other terms of address such as “fella”, “Browny”, “you beauty” and “you little rippers”. All these lexical choices are used with the purpose of promoting Australian linguistic innovation that has given rise over the years.Therefore, as Roland Sussex states, “Australian English is becoming well known for its quirky, larrikin, idiosyncratic creativeness”. From this, it shows exactly, how Australians are playful on their language, in a way that can reflect values of being laid-back, acceptance and social equality.

The Australian accent is a distinct feature of how rich our language can be. It’s known that “the cultural DNA of this country is the sounds of the way we speak”, and attitudes of various accents is a large indicator of national identity. Once perceived as a mixture of “intelligence” and “success”, the cultivated accent was considered to be spoken by those of higher class and authority, a feature being round vowel sounds such as “o” in “fowl”. However, they are now considered as “less friendly” and “less trustworthy”, described by Howie Manns. Furthermore, the use of the Broad accent is “rated as reliable, strong and trustworthy” (Peck), through phonological features such as the the non-rhotic “r” in “car”, the flapping of the intervocalic such as “water” heard as “wader”, and the vocalised “L” sounds such as in “milk” or “hill”. These show cultural values and attitudes associated with the use of regional accents. Most importantly, the gradual shift to the general accent is “associated with blooming national confidence and a maturing identity” (Cox and Palethorpe). This gradual change is reflective of the dynamic relationship between accent and values, all of which eventually impact the Australian identity.

Ethnolects in Australia reflects our cultural diversity, playing an important role in manifesting our multicultural values. Migrant ethnolects reveal the cultural affiliation of a speaker, as well pushes the boundaries of the Australian Standard. This is particularly seen from children of migrants, who have a tendency to incorporate language features from their parent’s first language. For example, those of Chinese background speak with more stressed vowels, due to the importance of intonation in Mandarin. Italians, are also commonly heard ending their words with vowels, such as “footballa” rather than “football”. Syntactically, Greek’s lack determiners and prepositions, such as “the” and “to”, heard if they were to say “come shops” or “can I have money?” rather than “can I have some money?”. However prevalent ethnolects are in society, attitudes towards the way they challenge the Standard, has triggered prescriptivists. As they are not welcome to change, they oppose these varieties due to the belief that they are corrupting our vernacular language. However, this is not common, due to the Australian values of egalitarianism and equality, many Australians believe that “all varieties have the same potential for complexity and richness of expression”, and that there exists “no linguistic grounds for saying one is better than another” (Kate Burridge). Therefore the idea of that ethnolect varieties contributes to the richness and complexity of our language is greatly supported, and simultaneously, contributes to the Australian identity through language.

Ultimately, Australian English portrays the national identity. Through inventive lexical choices, that are continuously created and retained, our language reflects the playful and casual nature of most Australians. Furthermore, a shift to the general Australian accent is indicative of changing values and attitudes. The complexity of our language is further enhanced with the contribution of ethnolect varieties. Although this may not be agreed to by prescriptivists, there is no stopping the way Australian English is constantly being influenced by all these factors, which in turn, reflects the identity and values of the nation.

Alexicology

  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 28
  • Respect: 0
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #279 on: November 08, 2017, 07:49:55 pm »
0
Hi, can someone possibly mark my essay? Also a rough score out of 15. Thank you!

Prompt: 'Profanity is an emotive communicative tool which plays a variety of roles in contemporary Australian society'. Discuss

In Australia, swearing is held acceptable in certain contexts. There has been an increasing use of profanity in political and sport contexts as a marker of Australian identity. The milestone for conveying emotion is through profanity, it is a powerful tool for reducing social distance with others. Taboo language is used for in group solidarity of younger generations. These are only some roles of profanity in contemporary Australian society.
 
In AFL, swearing has a major purpose for conveying emotions. It is used as an expression of “freedom of speech” (Stimulus a) to show the spirit of the sport. At post- Grand Final interview of the Richmond vs Adelaide game, Jack Riewoldt screams “We are fucking premiers!” (September 2017)  In this context it is used as an intensifier to emphasise the end of a 37 year drought since their last premiership. Also, Dustin Martin whom is another player from the Richmond Football Club screams “Fucken oath” (September 2017) showing his excitement through his Australian Identity. Another example is when Bryan Taylor interviews Dustin Martin and asks him “How do you block all that crap out?”(October 2017) reducing the social distance between Bryan Taylor and Dustin Martin, which makes the conversation more personal. It also attracts viewers fulfilling the purpose of this conversation between Dustin Martin and Bryan Taylor. Profanity used in this way helps people in the AFL industry convey strong emotions.

Swearing in political contexts has increased in recent years. Crystal has said that “Swearing has an important social function” but this depends on certain contexts. Liberal MP Luke Howarth was caught swearing on live TV when he dismissed a question about female representations in the Liberal party. He referred to the question as “fucked” (September 2017). He displayed his negative emotions verbally and still this language was acceptable in Australia and shows the Australian identity as being laid back. Howarth was trying to level with people of the same social rank. “The acceptability of swearing has changed, the unwritten rule of no swearing in public has faded” says Mr McCrindle and refers to people especially politicians. Australians are laid back and show their identity through their casual language.
 
Teenagers express multiple emotions through swearing between their peers. Offensive name-calling such as ‘nigga’ and “snake” triggers angry feelings towards others. On the other hand, teens can use profanity to convey positive emotions like “fuck yes” and “Let’s fucking go” which are used to emphasise the situation and builds in-group solidarity. In addition, the internet has come up with many swear words such as “lit af” and “FFS” to create another dimension of swearing that is less personal  online rather than face to face. Pop culture especially rap music will involve many swear words like “fuckin with me, call up on a uzi” sung in the new song called rockstar by Post Malone and 21 Savage in order to vent frustration or portray their point of view through a song.



In contemporary Australian society, swearing has become more acceptable due to its various roles. Profanity in the context of AFL conveys many strong emotions in the spirit of sport and emphasises peoples’ experiences. The public use of swearing like in political contexts reduces social distance between the politicians and the audience. Lastly teenagers will swear to build in-group solidarity and rap songs will usually have taboo language to vent strong emotions about rappers’ lives. 
« Last Edit: November 08, 2017, 07:54:15 pm by Alexicology »

coolkat3378

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 5
  • Respect: 0
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #280 on: March 18, 2018, 05:18:10 pm »
0
Hi I would greatly appreciate if someone could mark this, i have not yet completed it but i would like it if someone marks it on what i have so far...: Essay prompt= "Medea is symbolic of the powerful intelligent woman caged by patriarchy. Discuss"

In his tragic play Medea, Euripides explores the notion of the women in the Athenian society being caged by patriarchy. As the main idea of the play, Euripides exemplifies the inequality between man and woman at the time. With this, he paints a picture for the audience, showing the differences in ways both genders were treated and the ways in which they acted upon it; hence, the women being "caged". The protagonist of the play, Medea: an intelligent, cruel, impassioned and vengeful woman in the Greek society, was one that stood out in the crowd and did not follow the demands the Athenians set out for women. Because of the disheartened pain her husband Jason caused her, it lead her to become intimidating to the patriarchy. Ongoing, Medea showed the feministic qualities which as a result pursued her to present women as a whole.

Although women at the time in the play were unjustifiably disadvantaged, Medea was a woman of deinos characteristics that acted upon the actions of others. It is evident she was not an ordinary woman in their society, "Because i have a little knowledge, some are filled with jealousy. Others think me secretive, and crazy." Medea found it uneasy to comprehend that she was discriminated against because she was 'clever'. She was a woman who emerged amongst the crowd of caged women. The society demonised women of intelligence, and Medea was against those stereotypical views held in the patriarchy, "Of all creatures that can feel and think, we women are the worst treated things alive." Because the women of the Greek society were confined from their beliefs and rights, they resisted to speak up, which is why both Creon and Jason had the tendency to feel threatened by her, "you [Medea] are a woman of some knowledge, versed in many an unsavoury skill." This only made Medea much more masculine then she initially started of to be. However, that masculinity may have executed her to take part in horrific actions.

Rightfully, Medea became indignant by virtue of being a woman in the patriarchy that has mortified her ambitions. While Medea was exposed to an environment that 'depended on slave labour and the oppression of women', she was also brutally hurt by her husband Jason as he went off to marry another woman, for power and status; which in turn, provoked her to carry out actions a stereotypical Athenian woman would abide to do. She is a victim of the obsession and excessive love she had for Jason; after hurting her, it only caused Medea to become a stronger woman. However, Medea participated in barbarous acts of revenge. She is said to be a 'skilled manipulator' which turned her innocent personality as a mother and a wife into a vengeful and corrupted woman which exposed the harmatia she had within her, which potentially may have been the cause of Jason's wrongdoings, "Oh, I married a tigress, not a woman, not a wife and yoked myself to a hater and destroyer." Jasons 'unfaithfulness drives her to commit horrific acts' against him. From murdering princess Glauce, to king Creon, then to both Jasons and Medeas children. The murder of king Creon and princess Glauce ruined the chances of Jason becoming king. Thus, not only did Medea hurt Jason emotionally, by killing their children, but mentally, by murdering his ambitions. Eventually, Medeas revenge for Jason became her passion and obsession, "my passion is master of my reason." Hence, Medea used that compulsion to satisfy her needs and wants of revenge.

Euripides thoroughly points out the injustices and 'blind spots' in the Greek society set during 432 BC; as a character of intelligence and dignity, Euripides focuses on Medea succeeding to present all unprivileged Athenian women. As a pro-feminist and one who has had experience of being imprisoned in a world of men, she aims to stand before the rest of these women that were in some ways seen as the Athenian 'prisoners'.

peter.g15

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 128
  • Respect: +25
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #281 on: March 24, 2018, 10:31:30 pm »
+2
Hi I would greatly appreciate if someone could mark this, i have not yet completed it but i would like it if someone marks it on what i have so far...: Essay prompt= "Medea is symbolic of the powerful intelligent woman caged by patriarchy. Discuss"

In his tragic play Medea, Euripides explores the notion of the women in the Athenian society being caged by patriarchy. As the main idea of the play, Euripides exemplifies the inequality between man and woman at the time. With this, he paints a picture for the audience, showing the differences in ways both genders were treated and the ways in which they acted upon it; hence, the women being "caged". The protagonist of the play, Medea: an intelligent, cruel, impassioned and vengeful woman in the Greek society, was one that stood out in the crowd and did not follow the demands the Athenians set out for women. Because of the disheartened pain her husband Jason caused her, it lead her to become intimidating to the patriarchy. Ongoing, Medea showed the feministic qualities which as a result pursued her to present women as a whole.

Although women at the time in the play were unjustifiably disadvantaged, Medea was a woman of deinos characteristics that acted upon the actions of others. It is evident she was not an ordinary woman in their society, "Because i have a little knowledge, some are filled with jealousy. Others think me secretive, and crazy." Medea found it uneasy to comprehend that she was discriminated against because she was 'clever'. She was a woman who emerged amongst the crowd of caged women. The society demonised women of intelligence, and Medea was against those stereotypical views held in the patriarchy, "Of all creatures that can feel and think, we women are the worst treated things alive." Because the women of the Greek society were confined from their beliefs and rights, they resisted to speak up, which is why both Creon and Jason had the tendency to feel threatened by her, "you [Medea] are a woman of some knowledge, versed in many an unsavoury skill." This only made Medea much more masculine then she initially started of to be. However, that masculinity may have executed her to take part in horrific actions.

Rightfully, Medea became indignant by virtue of being a woman in the patriarchy that has mortified her ambitions. While Medea was exposed to an environment that 'depended on slave labour and the oppression of women', she was also brutally hurt by her husband Jason as he went off to marry another woman, for power and status; which in turn, provoked her to carry out actions a stereotypical Athenian woman would abide to do. She is a victim of the obsession and excessive love she had for Jason; after hurting her, it only caused Medea to become a stronger woman. However, Medea participated in barbarous acts of revenge. She is said to be a 'skilled manipulator' which turned her innocent personality as a mother and a wife into a vengeful and corrupted woman which exposed the harmatia she had within her, which potentially may have been the cause of Jason's wrongdoings, "Oh, I married a tigress, not a woman, not a wife and yoked myself to a hater and destroyer." Jasons 'unfaithfulness drives her to commit horrific acts' against him. From murdering princess Glauce, to king Creon, then to both Jasons and Medeas children. The murder of king Creon and princess Glauce ruined the chances of Jason becoming king. Thus, not only did Medea hurt Jason emotionally, by killing their children, but mentally, by murdering his ambitions. Eventually, Medeas revenge for Jason became her passion and obsession, "my passion is master of my reason." Hence, Medea used that compulsion to satisfy her needs and wants of revenge.

Euripides thoroughly points out the injustices and 'blind spots' in the Greek society set during 432 BC; as a character of intelligence and dignity, Euripides focuses on Medea succeeding to present all unprivileged Athenian women. As a pro-feminist and one who has had experience of being imprisoned in a world of men, she aims to stand before the rest of these women that were in some ways seen as the Athenian 'prisoners'.

Not sure if you realised or not, but this is for English Language, not mainstream English (different things). You'll probably get a lot more responses if you post it there :)
2017: Psychology [50] | Accounting [45]
2018: Chemistry [49] | Biology [46] | English Language [41] | Mathematical Methods CAS [40] |  | UMEP Psychology [4.5]
ATAR: 99.50
UMAT: 91st
2019 - 23: Bachelor of Medical Science and Doctor of Medicine @ Monash University

FULL Tutoring in 2019

Offering Medical MMI Tutoring for 2020 Entry. DM for information!

walnut

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 19
  • Respect: 0
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #282 on: July 15, 2018, 01:34:55 am »
0
Hi, Just wondering if someone would be able to mark this (harshly) and possibly how to improve as i'm aware that my essays still feel undeveloped and aren't expressive enough. Cheers!!

‘Those who are critical of the use of jargon do not appreciate its vital role in communication’

Jargon is frequently satirised as an indicator of class and identity in our current society but jargon simply isn’t a discriminator where those who understand it are more superior. Rather it is an essential tool required to articulate precisely especially in more serious and consequential environments such as in a court or a surgery room where jargon helps to minimise uncertainty and deaths respectively.  It also holds a fundamental role in establishing in-group memberships and is a natural occurrence, which allows members who understand the jargon to communicate effectively. This is done by the utilisation of a variety of career specific lexemes, which allows communication to be more cohesive on both ends. Through the use of this idea, it demonstrates how vital jargon can be in both general conversations and discussions between leaders across the globe.

Jargon has always been a marker of identity; it is generally perceived that those who understand it will utilise it in order to make discussions more cohesive. Morphological career terms such as ‘stethoscope’, ‘white-coat’ and ‘hospital’ are normally associated with doctors; therefore just through the utterance of these words it already establishes an identity and the expertise associated with the career. This also creates a whole stigma surrounding the prestige of understanding the career jargon and can cause an outsider who doesn’t use the same jargon to feel out of place. Contrastingly, using career specific terms can enable more cohesive discussions given that both parties understand the jargon, results in a more meaningful discussion. Furthermore, jargon can be perceived as offensive if both interlocutors aren’t on the same page which can lead to a great deal of anger and frustration. The lexeme ‘adjure’ means to request earnestly whereas the lexeme ‘abjure’ which means to renounce, in a spoken discussion the misuse of these terms can cause obfuscation as aforementioned above, which can lead to confusion.

Jargons ability to exclude others can build social barriers within interlocutors however those who are especially critical of jargon may not fully understand its crucial role in communication, as those who understand it, can take advantage of it and use it to obfuscate the truth especially in the area of politics. Otherwise known as double speak. Therefore, if the underlying connotation of the text is intentionally concealed through jargon, then it is a known understanding that frustration associated with the language will grow therefore leading to the depreciation of jargon and its role in communication. Similarly, as interlocutors communicate in jargon once an outsider joins in on the conversion, the original interlocutors may change the topic subconsciously or out of good will as the outsider may feel even more left out if they continued however the outsider may feel out of place and discriminated due to the sudden shift of conversation. As Kate Burridge notes ‘It facilitates communication on one hand, but erects quite successful communication barriers on the other.’

In more life-threatening situations such as in the military or in a hospital where the correct use of jargon effectively helps to minimise collateral damage. The lexemes such as the noun ‘acetabulum’, ‘Trinity shell’ and impinging osteophyte’ that fall into the semantic field of hip replacement surgery allows the reader to easily navigate through the surgery report in a precise manner whereas, if more vague terms such as ‘front-of-hip-bone’ or ‘front-of-hip-joint’ were used it’d simply not be clear enough for those reading it to comprehend thus creating a possibility for error and resulting in unnecessary calamities.  Moreover, as medical texts such as reports of surgical procedures are official documents that use a range of sentence structures such as simple and complex sentences and listing techniques such as parallelisms to clearly state the procedures helps to avoid ambiguity thus increasing the clarity of the text through the incorporation of jargon.

Jargon is often seen as a mechanism of people who understand and those who are easily offended due to simply not understanding the jargon used. As such, it is often unappreciated and frequently criticised. Jargon is ultimately used to minimise collateral damage and creates cohesion between those who understand the jargon. After all as Kate Burridge asserts, "Linguistic bugbears are always in the eye of beholder...".


« Last Edit: July 15, 2018, 02:03:19 am by walnut »
you become what you study- Anonymus

chloevarley

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Respect: 0
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #283 on: August 10, 2018, 10:37:13 pm »
0
 This is just one paragraph of the essay.

The topic is: "whilst Australian English is seemingly open to change and variety, we still jusge others based on the way they communicate'

Prejudices surrounding ethnolects is an example of how individuals are judged on the way that they speak. Australia has seen an increase in number of language groups over the years due to factors such as globalisation. In Melbourne alone there are 215 different languages spoken. Ethnolects are marked by distinct lexical and phonetic/phonological features such as in German ethnolects which contain phonological features such as voicless stops in final position. Features such as this differ from the Australian English variety and may cause others who speak this variety to form negative prejudices towards speakers of various ethnolects. In 1985, an accent variation known as ‘ethnic broad’ established from Greek and Italian English speakers was highly prevalent in Sydney. People who spoke this accent variation were stigmatised as uneducated and of a lower social class and this covert prejudice lead to children to alter their accent to fit in with there peers at school. The prejudices and stigma surrounding ethnolects illustrates how individuals can be judged on the way they speak.
« Last Edit: August 11, 2018, 07:57:24 am by chloevarley »

Themethlover

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: 0
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #284 on: September 15, 2018, 10:34:29 am »
0
I know this is for essays, but would somebody help me with feedback for an analysis? At the start of the year they were fairly easy, but now we have to incorporate identity into it and its just made everything so much more confusing