Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

October 15, 2019, 04:46:12 am

Author Topic: English Language essay submission and marking  (Read 102625 times)  Share 

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

mtDNA

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 152
  • Respect: +47
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #255 on: September 20, 2017, 08:42:59 pm »
+5
Hello, Could you please correct this? The topic is The language we use says alot about our identity and the groups we belong to. Thank you.

Hey Sarah,

These are my corrections for your essay (I’ll try mention different things to previous users):

Topic - Individual & Group Identity:

Our speech (Just a nitpick: perhaps use ‘language’ instead of ’speech’ since we can perform an identity through the written mode -> think of teenspeak and e-communication) holds an important function of displaying our identity as well as more obvious functions of communicating our views (Perhaps write “...displaying our identity and communication our mantras” just to increase the readability). Gender has a major influence on the way we construct our language due to the differing social pressures and stereotypes. Many characteristics specific to an individual are intertwined in our idiolect (maybe expand on this point... not too sure what you’re getting at here). The sound of socio economic classes from the Bogan stereotype ( use apostrophes with bogan to hedge it due to its colloquial nature; alternatively, use a more sophisticated adjective) to business man can be easily identified. Information about geographical background is also prevalent in our slang and accent insert a comma here especially places where these geographical sociolects should much variance over a short distance (I’m not 100% sure what you’re getting at here, perhaps make your point somewhat more clear).

So for you intro, some points to consider are:
- Connect your sentences with some conjunctives and adverbials, such as ‘likewise’, ‘furthermore’, etc. so that it’s more cohesive
- Expand on your points a little: some of your ideas were a little ambiguous so try to make these more clear
- Perhaps mention something along the lines of conscious and unconscious language choices to perform our avowed and ascribed multiple identities somewhere in there to ‘wow’ the examiner
Apart from that, it was decent, but with some work you’ll get there  :)


To start off (I’m sorry but this really makes me cringe - if you were going to go with this approach, maybe ‘first and foremost’, but even still that’s a weak start to a first body. In reality you could cut this out and start with “a clear..."), a clear difference in an individual’s identity is gender comma which is clearly displayed in language. This difference has its roots in the ideals that society lays down for us, that being .... Of course not everyone follows them, but exploring some strong features give us insight into assumptions made about identity. According to x study from linguist y ... Women tend to stick closer to the standard and adhere to their interlocutors’ negative face needs. This is shown through their use of hedging expressions like ‘sort of’ and polite forms politeness markers like indirect request ‘would you by any chance like to give me a lift’ (to build up some metalanguage count, maybe discuss this as converting an imperative to an interrogative) and euphemism ‘senior’ or ‘postmenopausal’ instead of ‘old’. James Button wrote in that ‘the sound of girls’ soccer is ‘sorry … sorry… sorry’’, their frequent apologies show that from a young age girls don’t want to impose or else they will look pushy and overly confident (This is a really good chance to insert a contemporary example; atm I can’t think of one, but an old one would be how Senator Wong was meowed {disgusting, I know} at when she deviated from the stereotype and didn’t adhere to the negative face needs of her opponents in the Senate. Alternatively, I think I read something along the lines of a person who wanted to ban the terms ‘feisty’ or ‘bossy’ due to the sexist undertones they hold). In contrast, men may generally rely on not attending to the positive face needs of others and using nonstandard features to maintain a ‘macho man’ image where they use colloquial expressions especially in the form of expletives like ‘fair dinkum’ and swearing (use a linguist to back up your claim; and you can maybe mention another contemporary example such as the ‘mansplaining’ phenomena, not sure how relevant this is though). In this way comma the lingo (lingo is too informal for an essay; maybe ‘language palettes or linguistic repertoires to add some flair to the essay) of males and females differ and this aspect of individual’s identity can be determined.

Overall it was an alright body, just in an exam situation you need to ensure you differentiate yourself from other students by adding something unique to the essay. Since you just stated theory here, it really is somewhat ’textbook-y’, something you really need to avoid if you want top marks. A way to go about this would be to add some more info and ideas, or add contemporary examples. For instance, in my identity sac, I delved more deeper into society’s preconceived notions regarding the patriarchy, as well as how the language repertories can act as a social barrier between the genders, in a sense forming an in-group and an out-group (although this what what my prompt was focussed on). Additionally, you can elaborate on what happens when we deviate from the notions of gender identity and the associated stigmatisation we face - I personally looked at Jacqui Lambie and her use of phonological downshifting (a good place to use IPA as well), and the response from the public, with her being associated with lower intelligence. Um another thing you could mention and discuss would be the language of those who identify as non-binary or gender fluid and/or the language around sexual orientation, particularly since this pretty topical atm.

Stereotypically, a straight forward continuum that is used to determine the socio-economic class of an individual or group is their degree of standard language used. Higher classes use what they would could call ‘Proper English’ to gain overt prestige over the majority. This is because standard features such as using correct grammar like ‘ such fun’ and furthermore, elevated, elongated adjectives like ‘marvellous’ and ‘atrocious’ are linked with power, education and wealth. Alternatively, lower socio-economic status could be assumed when one has a broader accent and uses slang comma especially Australian hypocorisms like ‘barbie’ and ‘Davo’ and frequent explicit terms. However, these features do also embody ‘more human qualities like integrity, social attractiveness and friendliness’ according to Kate Burridge. Wherever a person falls in the continuum an extension of their traits will be judged as they are undeterminably intertwined and they are categorised in a group.

Again, you missed the mark with this body as well: contemporary examples are crucial for identity, so using an example of Turnbull using jargon or something to assert his identity as a ‘professional’ enables you to intertwine themes of education and occupation here. Also, if you are going to talk about accent for one end point on the continuum, you sorta need to do the same for the other (it sort of makes the body asymmetric). Furthermore, you really need to discuss some of these points in a lot more detail - the use of hypocorisms should be its own point, as themes of Australian identity can be added here, allowing you to talk about egalitarianism and in-group membership.

Finally, our geographical background also impacts the way we speak and has a way of accepting and excluding others. This is shown perfectly in the quote from Matt Campbell ‘If you’re from Melbourne, you’ll know Bay 13 is the possie at the ‘G where yobbos piff tinnies and go home in the back of a divvy van’’ You should elaborate before you insert you example/quote. The shortening of ‘Melbourne cricket ground’ to ‘G’ and diminutives ‘yobbo’ and ‘tinnies’ would only be recognisable to those who live in the area. In fact, because of this comma it is more special to the group because no one else would be able to understand in order to be part of conversation (Nice place to mention covert prestige and bolstering in-group solidarity). It is common that lexemes denoting place are reduced like the shopping centres ‘chaddy’ and ‘southy’ and ‘franga’ which has a further connotation of lower socioeconomic Don’t mention this since this was the last paragraph class because it is commonly used in it diminutive form. Accent is also a major marker of place; not significantly in Australia because there isn’t much regional variation but more so in America and England Pertain to Australia. Since there is such variety in a relatively small area, accent can be a major factor in separation of groups and ‘It signals identification with one group and rejection of another’ as quoted from (G.moodie).

Again, you didn’t hit the nail on the head for this one either, mainly because of the absence of contemporary example and weak integration of quotes. Moreover, you need to discuss the theory in more detail.

Overall, The way in which we perceive others is greatly influenced by our manner of speaking. It can differ as different groups like gender, place of origin and socioeconomic group share different nonstandard tendencies. When an individual uses these features they show their in-group membership and show solidarity and in this way are include and in turn exclude others.

What happened to the idiolect paragraph? Overall, I thought it was an ok essay, although it could be strengthened through the use of examples. Also, you should really discuss how language performs our multiple identities to bolster in-group membership and solidarity (group identity). As such, I’d probably give it a 7/15, since VCAA explains:

“Limited understanding of the topic, with ideas that are general, superficial and/or repetitive. Few supporting examples or evidence. Descriptive rather than analytical with little or no use of metalanguage. Some features of written discourse evident but not used consistently."

Therefore, add examples, and analyse the points in more detail to boost your essay up to the high range. Hope this helped  ;)
 


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


mtDNA

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 152
  • Respect: +47
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #256 on: September 20, 2017, 11:38:17 pm »
+5
Hey mgoulding,

The following are some amendments that I recommend:

Language can establish a sense of individuality as well as a sense of belonging and solidarity. It can, however, also be used to gain power and prestige. Discuss.

Identity is not a fixed constant. Language enables us to construct, change and redesign (fantastic way to describe it  :D ) our identity for different purposes. This could be to assert our personality or establishing ourselves as part of a group (instead of establish, I’d use ’sign’ or ‘mark'), but language can also be used in order to gain power and prestige. I think you could merge these first two sentences together to aid the clarity of the intro: ’through our language choices, we are able to construct, change, and redesign our identity for multiple purposes in order to assert our personality, mark the social groups to which we belong, and acquire authority and prestige’. Different social groups and contexts require different varieties of language to be utilised in order to communicate effectively (this is a nice place to mention in-group membership to reflect our group identity). Furthermore, individual identity is commonly displayed through the evolving online communication platform, whereas slang and jargon promote a sense of belonging and solidarity (not sure how this ties in, maybe find another place to mention this). Additionally, power and prestige can be gained through adhering to the overt or covert norms of society, but an individual's speech linguistic repertoire and the knowledge of how to use it is the most powerful of all not too sue what you’re getting at with the ‘but’....

So your intro is pretty decent; the points you’ve made are pretty good, at times though they can be a bit convoluting. Just to improve it, make sure it’s more cohesive (through conjunctions and adverbials) and split things which don’t really work well together (e.g. slang imo is more associated with group identity instead of individual). Also, add a linking sentence. 

An individual's speech language repertoire can be drawn upon in order to establish non-linguistic features about them. Their intelligence, aspirations and personal traits can all be assumed through idiosyncratic features of their language. The online society of the Internet (odd phrasing) is a great example of individual identity, where users have been forced to move away from the written standard, as it simulates a virtual conversation face to face, where spoken language is required. Graphic variation in online communication is reflective of natural speech patterns and personality. Punctuation, spelling and use of emojis in social media posts, all enable an individual to display their identity whilst talking to friends, or like minded people (Perhaps using a contemporary example here would be more effective). The ellipsis (...) enables a pause of thought which would be heard in spoken language to be imagined via a text, and elongation of vowel sounds such as “sooooo” allows interlocutors to convey the tone in which the may be speaking in (I think you really missed the mark here - the non-standard orthography here is hyperbolic, so mention the use of exaggeration in a verbal exchange may lead to one adhering to another’s positive face needs, thereby bolstering in-group membership [just through in the buzz words and the examiners will lick it up  ;D ] ). These small deviances from the written standard are crucial in displaying emotion which is required in online communication, and individuals are able to manipulate them in order to best express their identity for the context.

Tbh, I really think you should start this paragraph again from scratch and rework it to discuss teenspeak. In this way, you have access to a greater discuss and analysis on contemporary language features used by the younger demographic.

Humans are social beings, and hence have an innate desire to be apart of groups (Honestly this just sounds like you want to hit a word count  :( ). These circles - change this term have particular language requirements that make it easier to communicate, and in order to be included, it is essential that this language is utilised effectively. Both military and medical fields employ jargon and slang, which creates group identity and solidarity. Military jargon employs doublespeak as noted in Joel Homer’s 1979 glossary text “Jargon”, where soldiers were instructed to “render hostile personnel inoperable” rather than “kill the enemy”. Contrastively, medical jargon often consists of very specific lexemes which have no replacement in everyday language. Disease, drug and operation names all are examples of this. Both of these complex language forms are used in order to communicate effectively between members of the same group, and are hence clearly associated with these circles, even if the meaning is unknown by outsiders. 

Well first and foremost, you really need to make the paragraph longer and more analytical. Again, you need more contemporary examples. Also note that you mentioned slang, yet you never discussed it later in the paragraph.

Now, I believe you made jargon the focus, so my advise would be to make the paragraph on occupation or something, using jargon as an example. Moreover, doublespeak doesn’t build in-group membership, it obfuscates, so you need to change this.


Slang can be used to purposely exclude and form barriers between those who are apart of the group and those who are not. Medical and military slang are again very good examples of this, where the meaning is required to be kept a secret from patients or relatives of patients and superiors or civilians, respectively. This is due to the usually offensive nature of the slang, which is utilised to build rapport amongst the groups, and further reinforce their group identity. The Happy Hospitalist in states that acronyms written on handover sheets in hospital ward often contain unofficial acronyms such as “FTF” (failed to fly) for a suicide attempt, or use them as a disguise in spoken language such as ELFs (evil little fuckers) to refer to kids. Similarly, although there are many official acronyms in Military slang such as AWOL (absent without leave) and NLT (no later than), there are many that have been coined by the soldiers themselves such as “SCRAN” (Shit Cooked by the Royal Australian Navy) and “RHIP” (Rank Has Its Privileges). These are obviously required to be kept a secret from superiors, but build rapport amongst those who understand it. The language in both of these cases ensure group solidarity and form in group membership which allows them to cope with the high stress level of their work environment.

I thought you had some interesting examples, just make sure they aren’t all the same thing - initialisms and acronyms. Also, you need to analyse it it more detail, discussing HOW these build in-group membership and what identity they’re reflecting to achieve this.

Both the dominant and broad communities (”Please explain” ~ ‘Senator’ Hanson) have norms which when odd phrasing adhered to, give power to those who use them. This is due to the prestige associated with the language within that community. The covert norms of particular sociolects and social circles, such as young teenage males, vary drastically from what may be considered appropriate by the dominant community. For example, many young Australian teenagers have replaced the mode of address “mate” with the strong dysphemism “cunt” such as “Hey cunts!”. This word (use lexeme instead of word to add flair to the essay) has been deemed as “not as offensive” in Australia as it may be in Britain or America, during a court case in August 2017, yet a majority of the population reject use of the word. This mode of address is associated with this sub group (not necessarily, young ozy males aren’t the only ones saying “cunt" ) however, and those who use it correctly gain COVERT prestige and power within the circle, but not outside within the dominant community. In contrast, Standard Australian English is associated with power, wealth and education., and hence so too are the people who use it [EXAMPLES!!!]. These things are held in high regard by many people, and so it gains overt prestige.

Again, this is a pretty weak paragraph. Merge your paragraph on jargon and occupation here to make it better.

Having an wide individualistic speech repertoire and the ability to apply it in multiple situations is what allows our individual and group identities to be established. Language enables us to develop all of our identities and vary them depending on the platforms through which we communicate, the people with whom we are communicating and the image we wish to portray. The varying groups and subgroups within our Australian society all have standards of their own and require different language choices in order to establish power and prestige amongst the circle with whom we wish to communicate. Our language choices allow for our identity to be fluid, not rigid, and hence it serves multiple purposes.

Ok so I’m sorry to say this, but your essay was lacking not only in the analysis, but also in your ideas. Given the essay prompt, I believe it’s leading you to discuss individual identity, group identity, and the acquisition of power and prestige through performing a certain identity. As such, gender and/or sexual orientation for BP1 would be wise as they’re reflections of our individual identity. Teenspeak would be a nice, easy one to do for group, but one on ethnolects or national identity would also suffice. Then your last one would be on occupation and socioeconomic class, where you can discuss overt prestige and jargon. As always, you need a lot more contemporary examples, as well as linguist quotes. For this reason, I’d mark the essay a 6/15.

Hope this helps  :)


P.s sorry for any spelling errors and whatnot, I haven’t had the chance to check my post.


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


mtDNA

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 152
  • Respect: +47
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #257 on: September 22, 2017, 06:02:28 pm »
+4
My prompt was: " What does Australian English look and sound like today and how does it reflect our identity as a nation"
A reference to a stimulus quote is present in paragraph 1 (Vic Gorman)

Language evolves overtime to in response to the ways which people use it to convey information and express their identity, and Australian English is no exception to this rule. Australian English speakers are still identifiable by the sounds of their speech, and continue to use lexemes unique to the land down under; [just a small nitpick: you may want to stop the sentence and create the contrast in the following sentence to form a greater distinction between your signposts. In this way, it aids the clarity and readability, but as I said, a small nitpick] however, the increased exchange between cultures and widespread use of the internet has also left a distinct impact. This has not erased the Australian identity; rather, it allows change and enables speakers to express multiple aspects of their identity through their use of Australian English.

This is a pretty solid intro so there isn’t much to comment on tbh.

Speakers have become more confident in the acceptance of the Australian accent, which has created an environment where variations on of it are not seen as a threat to its integrity (It’d be good to make a small note on the ‘cultural cringe’ movement here to show the examiner a breadth of knowledge, but as I said, just a small note since it’s not imperative and your aim is to have a ~700 word essay). This positive perception of Australian speech (if you wanted to be a bit extra, you could use ‘phonetics’ instead of ’speech’) can be seen in the decrease of the cultivated accent, which was indicative of the British Received Pronunciation being preferred. The broad accent, adopted in opposition to the cultivated accent, has also seen a decline in usage; the vast majority of Australians now use a general Australian accent in some form (maybe use statistics to discuss the decline in Broad and Cultivated to go into more detail). As the Australian accent is no longer perceived as being threatened and thus is not rigidly enforced by most Australians, it is amenable to play and variation which expresses other aspects of the speakers’ background. Vic Gorman wrote in a 2006 letter to the Green Guide that “Australia is a country full of different accents”, a statement which remains accurate to this day (I’m not really a fan of how you opened a sentence and just put in the quote; maybe merge this sentence with another so the quote is supplementary to your discussion... hopefully that made sense). The formation of a myriad of ethnolects is no surprise when Australia’s rich cultural diversity is considered. The 2016 census shows that half of the Australian population has at least one parent who was born overseas, and that over 300 different languages are used within Australia. Linguistic PhD research candidate Josh Clothier believes that these ethnolects are used to both “express identity as Australians of a particular descent” and “to express links with their heritage communities” (loved the census example and quote  ;) ). This shift from variation in broadness to cultural variation serves our community by retaining Australian identity comma yet allowing for concurrent expression of additional cultural identities.

This is also a pretty good para, so well done! To improve it, maybe go more in depth with your discussion for a SAC  setting since you somewhat scrape the surface of the concepts you discuss; however, in an exam setting this paragraph would suffice given the time pressures and whatnot. NOTE: I’d highly recommend you make a stronger link to identity, discussing our views of multiculturalism and whatnot with ethnolects so you completely address the question - apart from this, it’s pretty good.

The common use of the internet as a medium of expression has changed the way that Australians use phrases and lexemes, so they may be easily understood. Communicating with people from different countries and backgrounds without paralinguistic features provides ample opportunities for accidental miscommunication. In the past, a common aspect of Australian speech was the deliberate use of descriptors which are antithetical to the described content. For example, the use of the nickname “bluey” to describe someone with red hair. However, research by linguist Dr Louisa White indicates that it is rare for a Victorian or Queensland high school student to have a nickname formed in this way. Similarly, the use of expressive idioms such as “flat out like a lizard drinking” is declining, especially among younger generations of Australians. By contrast, slang such as “Maccas” which are distinctly Australian have remained in use, potentially because it is easier to either guess the meaning or use a slang dictionary or website, and the unknown lexeme is clearly identified. In contrast (perhaps try not ‘double contrast’ ideas as it gets a bit complex to comprehend), it may be difficult for international speakers to determine what components of discourse were part of the confusing phrase and thereby search for an explanation. Potentially even more dangerous, someone forced to guess the meaning of a phrase may interpret the meaning in an unintended way which detracts from the speaker’s goals. Eschewing parts of Australian language with clear potential for misinterpretation and instead emphasising Australian lexemes allows for the expression of Australian identity and reduces the likelihood of miscommunication.

Tbh, I’m not too sure how this idea really relates to the given prompt; again, there is a really weak link to identity, which is a crucial element of the prompt. Maybe make your point a bit more clear, or just scrap the paragraph and think of a stronger point to discuss.

The increased cultural exchange both in online and physical communities where Australians are present has also resulted in the transfer of words between cultures. Americanisms such as “Dude” and “y’all” are increasingly finding their way to the lexicon of Australians, and in particular children. Further to this, the use of autocorrect and predictive services which use American English increases the prevalence of American spellings and normalizes their use in communication between and by Australians. However, the transfer of culture and ways of speaking is bi-directional. Internet linguistic Getchen McCulloch believes that Australians are responsible for the initial creation of “DoggoLingo” (this seems a tad old to mention as a ‘contemporary’ example...), a popular way of talking about dogs across the internet. Most of the lexemes in this English variant are diminutives based on suffixation or alternate spelling of pre-existing Standard English words, with the term “Doggo” displaying the Australian trait of adding an “o” as a suffix to form slang. This shares the informal aspect of Australian identity, showing that even as Australian lexicology shifts accepts change from other countries, Australian identity markers are also being used internationally.

Like the last two paragraphs, I think you’ve missed the mark with ‘identity’ - you need to explicitly discuss this in detail. Your point is good, just mix identity in the melting pot and you’ll get there.

Australian language use has changed and will continue to change in modern times to be more compatible with other Englishes. However, rather than erasing Australian identity, new avenues of expression in which multiple identities are performed concurrently are being used in spoken and written discourse.

Overall, it was a pretty good essay, but the let down was the weak link to identity. It’s good that you can write in a really succinct manner, and it seems as though you have the knowledge, so this essay has the potential of getting full or near full marks. However, you really needed to discuss identity in more detail, and more contemporary examples would’ve been nice as well (I noticed you used some pretty good ones like the census data, but others like ‘maccas’ and ‘doggolingo’ are a bit outdated. To counteract this, you could find a recent example of this being used (so in one of my sacs, I discussed ‘mansplaining’ in reference to a specific occurrence in the senate). Further to this, you can boost the quality by amending the points you make: maybe do a separate paragraph on ethnolects and its contribution to Aus English, mention Aus slang in more detail with contemporary examples (like hypocorisms by a politician, analysis can then be made with positive face needs, Australian qualities, etc.), and mention Aus phonetics in more detail and what it says about our identity. To mark it, I’d probably give it an 11 or 12 out of 15, but this could easily be a 15 given more contemporary examples and and better points.

P.s. sorry if there are any spelling mistakes or some things sound a bit confusing, I’m just writing this in a bit of a rush. Anyway, I hope this helps  ;D




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


DailyInsanity

  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 31
  • Respect: +1
  • School: Northcote HIgh School
  • School Grad Year: 2017
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #258 on: September 27, 2017, 01:01:11 am »
0
Hey Guys, would someone mind having a look at my essay and giving some feedback. Thanks!

‘Australian English is not a single entity; it comprises many different varieties’ Discuss.

The term ‘Australian English’ (AE) encompasses a vast number of varieties, each representing a unique sector of Australian culture. The variety viewed by mainstream society as the most prestigious is Standard Australian English (SAE), and even so this standardized variety has variations in accent, each with their associated social attitude. Other examples of varieties include ethnolects (such as Lebanese Australian English (LAE)) and Aboriginal Australian English (AAE), which is distinct from ethnolects. The diversity of these varieties is only natural as it reflects the myriad of ethnicities, cultures and faiths practiced within the country. Attitudes towards these linguistic variations do not detract the validity of the languages themselves, and such varieties that have covert prestige are often of great value to speakers as it allows them to “construct ourselves as social beings, to signal who we are and who we are not and cannot be” (Sterling).

SAE is distinct from other varieties of AE. SAE is commonly viewed as the ‘best’ variety of Australian English, although this should not be the case. Although hard to define, SAE is ‘standard’ as it has been codified and prescribed in official domains of law, government, education etc.… This does not imply SAE is ‘better’ than other varieties, but instead that the variety has been adopted throughout history by powerful upper class member to be used as the standard in certain societal contexts. SAE has varying lexical differences compared to other varieties of English and AE, an example being “Chateau Cardboard” – an ironic and humorous term for cask wine. This inventiveness reflects the playful nature of Australian slang and thus Australians themselves, with linguist Howard Manns stating “Australian drinkers are known to have a bit of fun with French” (2017). SAE is non-rhotic and frequently contains many diphones and triphones – “multiple vowels within the same space” (Manns, 2017). Colloquialism are also often employed, signalling the relaxed and ‘easy-going’ nature of Australians, an example being ‘No worries, mate’ with Linguist Anna Weirzbicka saying “’no worries mate’ exemplifies Australian culture and identity”.  There is also wide variation in the SAE accent, which lies on a continuum ranging from Broad to Cultivated. The broad accent often has flapping present which sees consonants such as ‘t’ not being fully pronounced, for example ‘butter’ becomes ‘budder’. The accent also often has drawn out vowel sounds such as in ‘look at moiiye’ (Kath and Kim). The broad accent is typically associated with the ‘working class’ or uneducated Australians, which is not always true, as in the case of former PM Julia Gillard. The Cultivated accent heavily conforms to SAE, with minimal informal features such as discourse particles, ellipsis and slang. This accent is often considered ‘upper class’ and associated with British Received Pronunciation. However, as Australians have built confidence in their national identity there has been a decline in the use of the cultivated accent, with Kate Burridge stating “Put simply, talking ‘posh’ doesn’t have the same prestige (or power) it once had”. SAE is one of the many varieties of Australian English and is prescribed as the standard in many domains of society.

Due to the rise in immigration and multiculturalism, varieties of AE influenced by other languages, or ‘ethnolects’ have formed, each with their own unique surrounding culture and function. Speakers of ethnolects are generally later generation migrants who are influenced by their family. The 2016 census shows that half of the Australian population has at least one parent who was born overseas, and that over 300 languages are used within Australia. Furthermore, speakers often have a good command of SAE and their non-standard ethnolect, and use which ever variety best suits the circumstance. Ethnolects are generally not viewed as prestigious as SAE, perhaps because speakers are generally migrants, thus giving such varieties covert prestige. An example of an ethnolect is Lebanese Australian English (LAE), a variety of AE with Arabic influence. LAE has distinct lexical differences compared to SAE, examples being ‘Habib’ meaning ‘Darling’ but could be viewed as LAE’s equivalent for ‘Mate’, or ‘Yallah’ meaning ‘let’s go’ or ‘goodbye’. As stated before, ethnolects are generally not respected as much as SAE, but they do serve an important function for speakers.  By adopting the use of an ethnolect, a speaker can display their membership to an exclusive community, thus allowing them to construct an identity for oneself whilst connecting with their ancestral roots. As Bruce Moore described it “(ethnolects) are used consciously to separate the speakers from Anglo-Australian values”. Hence a speaker of an ethnolect may choose to use the variety when around friends or family who also speak it to enhance solidarity within the community, or may switch to SAE when the context requires it, for example, in a courtroom. Ethnolects are another variety of AE, that while are not viewed as the most prestigious dialect, serve an important function for speakers.

Aboriginal Australian English (AAE) is a complex and rule governed dialect of English spoken widely by Australian Aboriginal people. The variety lies on a continuum, ranging from very light (close to SAE) to very heavy (close to Kriol or other indigenous languages). AAE has varying semantic differences when compared to SAE, examples being ‘Deadly’ meaning ‘excellent’ and ‘Camp’ meaning ‘home’ or ‘house’. The pronouns ‘he’ and ‘him’ are also used for females and inanimate objects. The syntax is also different as in AAE there is often an absence of auxiliary verbs, for example, ‘We are working’ becomes ‘We workin’’ (with the g-clipping). This should not be seen as simply ‘dropping words out’ but instead “…Systematically changing the whole way in which English is bolted together” – Professor of Linguistics Ian Malcolm. As with speakers of ethnolects, speakers of AAE can often choose which dialect they use to express a range of identities and thus to suit the situation at hand. The colloquial nature of AAE suggests that Aboriginal culture is ‘easy-going’ and highly values ‘mateship’ allowing rapport to be built among speakers and thus enhancing the in-group solidarity of the community.  AAE is not as respected as much in mainstream society as SAE, however, as with ethnolects, AAE serves an important function for its speakers in that it allows speakers to display one’s identity to society and one’s membership to the Aboriginal community. This, however, often leads to affliction among speakers of AAE, as the competing needs to construct one’s identity through language and also to be taken seriously and provided with equal opportunities in society must be reconciled. AAE is another variety of AE which serves a purpose of allowing speakers to separate themselves from mainstream SAE to express a central part of their identity.

AE is not a single entity, but rather a dynamic and multifaceted group of varieties which display the rich cultural and ethnic landscape of Australia. Examples of such varieties include LAE and AAE, which serve similar functions in that they allow speakers to display their belonging to an exclusive community thereby constructing one’s identity through language, or as linguist Grey Dickson describes it “Like all of us, the googleboxes speak in ways that reflect who they are, where they’ve come from and where they’re going” (on the topic of the TV show ‘Googlebox’).

mtDNA

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 152
  • Respect: +47
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #259 on: September 29, 2017, 09:21:01 pm »
+4
Hey Guys, would someone mind having a look at my essay and giving some feedback. Thanks!
‘Australian English is not a single entity; it comprises many different varieties’ Discuss.

Hey Daily Insanity, my comments are listed below:

The term ‘Australian English’ (AE) encompasses a vast number of varieties, each representing a unique sector of Australian culture. The variety viewed by mainstream society as the most prestigious is Standard Australian English (SAE), and even so odd phrasing this standardized variety has variations in accent, each with their associated social attitude. Other examples of varieties include ethnolects (such as Lebanese Australian English (LAE)) and Aboriginal Australian English (AAE), which is distinct from ethnolects. The diversity of these varieties is only natural as it reflects the myriad of ethnicities, cultures and faiths practiced within the country. Additionally, varieties including ethnolects, which are representative of the myriad of ethnicities, cultures and faiths practiced within the country, act as another constituent of Australian English. Attitudes towards these linguistic variations varieties do not detract from the validity of the languages themselves Not too sure what you’re getting at here..., and such varieties that have covert prestige are often of great value to speakers as it allows them to “construct ourselves as social beings, to signal who we are and who we are not and cannot be” (Sterling).

The intro was ok, just your expression at times was really confusing, consequently reducing the readability. Also, your last point isn’t very clear (mainly because of the expression), so you need to have another look at this and re-word it. Now, I haven’t read the last paragraph yet, but from what I gathered from your signpost, I imagine you’re going to discuss our varieties of language bolster our identity, which isn’t necessarily the crux of the prompt; you can mention this within your paragraphs as an analysis if it’s appropriate, but I’m not sure if you should spend an entire paragraph discussing it...

SAE is distinct from other varieties of AE Try expand this sentence as you shouldn’t use a simple sentence to open; perhaps merge it with the following sentence. SAE is commonly viewed as the ‘best’ variety of Australian English, although this should not be the case Why not? Who are you to tell an examiner what variety to use? It may not necessarily be the best depending on the context (e.g. to perform an individualistic identity), but in some contexts it is the best to use (e.g. legal documents), so you can’t just make that assertion. Although hard to define, SAE is ‘standard’ as it has been codified and prescribed in official domains, such as law, government, and education. etc.… This does not imply SAE is ‘better’ than other varieties, but instead that the variety has been adopted throughout history by powerful upper class members to be used as the standard in certain societal contexts. SAE has varying lexical differences compared to other varieties of English and AE, an example being “Chateau Cardboard” – an ironic and humorous term for cask wine. This inventiveness reflects the playful nature of Australian slang and thus Australians themselves, with linguist Howard Manns stating “Australian drinkers are known to have a bit of fun with French” (2017). SAE is non-rhotic and frequently contains many diphones and triphones – “multiple vowels within the same space” (Manns, 2017). Colloquialisms are also often employed, signalling the relaxed and ‘easy-going’ nonchalant nature of Australians, an example being ‘No worries, mate’ with Linguist Anna Weirzbicka saying “’no worries mate’ exemplifies Australian culture and identity”.  There is also wide variation in the SAE accent Accent isn’t apart of just SAE, it is under the umbrella of AE, so this point is redundant, which lies on a continuum ranging from Broad to Cultivated. The broad accent often has flapping present which sees consonants such as ‘t’ not being fully pronounced, for example ‘butter’ becomes ‘budder’. The accent also often has drawn out vowel sounds such as in ‘look at moiiye’ (Kath and Kim) Find a newer example, this is way to old to use. The broad accent is typically associated with the ‘working class’ or uneducated Australians, which is not always true, as in the case of former PM Julia Gillard. The Cultivated accent heavily conforms to SAE, with minimal informal features such as discourse particles, ellipsis and slang. This accent is often considered ‘upper class’ and associated with British Received Pronunciation. However, as Australians have built confidence in their national identity there has been a decline in the use of the cultivated accent, with Kate Burridge stating “Put simply, talking ‘posh’ doesn’t have the same prestige (or power) it once had”. SAE is one of the many varieties of Australian English and is prescribed as the standard in many domains of society.

There isn’t much to say about this paragraph due to the fact that it needs to be re-worked to fit the prompt. There is a slight analysis on SAE which is ok (again, your expression really lets you down), but then you drift into accents, which is apart of AE, not just SAE. For instance, a person using another variety of English which is non-standard can still speak with a certain accent, such as the broad. Therefore that whole discussion really needs to be binned. Instead, think about SAE in its contexts (say government and legal domains) and expand on this, explaining WHY it’s used in these contexts, therefore showing it is a constituent of AE. If this isn’t fruitful, then maybe go onto a social variety, using Australian examples.

Due to the rise in immigration and multiculturalism, varieties of AE influenced by other languages, or ‘ethnolects’ have formed Examiners aren’t stupid, so there is no need to define ‘ethnolect’, particularly since you’ve already used it in the intro, each with their own unique surrounding culture and function odd phrasing. Speakers of ethnolects are generally later generation migrants who are influenced by their family. The 2016 census shows that half of the Australian population has at least one parent who was born overseas, and that over 300 languages are used within Australia. Furthermore, speakers often have a good command of SAE and their non-standard ethnolect, and use whichever variety best suits the circumstance situational context. Ethnolects are generally not viewed as prestigious as SAE, perhaps because speakers are generally migrants, thus giving such varieties covert prestige. An example of an ethnolect is Lebanese Australian English (LAE), a variety of AE with Arabic influence. LAE has distinct lexical differences compared to SAE, examples being ‘Habib’ meaning ‘Darling’ but could be viewed as LAE’s equivalent for ‘Mate’, or ‘Yallah’ meaning ‘let’s go’ or ‘goodbye’ Maybe try find a figure in society using these lexemes, this will stngthen your argument and will allow you to link it back to the prompt. Also, they’re a bit old, I think HSP would be a better fit, although that is still a tad old. As stated before Don’t be repetitive, ethnolects are generally not respected as much as SAE, There isn’t a real need to mention this, just analyse covert prestige, positive face needs, and shared identity since these are the main points of an ethnolect paragraph but they do serve an important function for speakers.  By adopting the use of an ethnolect, a speaker can display their membership to an exclusive community, thus allowing them to construct an identity for oneself whilst to connect connecting with their ancestral roots This sounds a little flowery, try change it to make it more formal. As Bruce Moore described it “(ethnolects) are used consciously to separate the speakers from Anglo-Australian values” tie the quote to your discussion; putting too much weight on a quote is a huge turn off. Hence a speaker of an ethnolect may choose to use the variety when around friends or family who also speak it to enhance solidarity within the community, or may switch to SAE when the context requires it, for example, in a courtroom. Ethnolects are another variety of AE, that while odd phrasing are not viewed as the most prestigious dialect, serve an important function for speakers.

I think you need to emphasise the fact that Australia is a multicultural society as this is the main theme of the body, then analyse the use of ehtnolects and the respective functions they hold to perform an identity. Relating this back to SAE is imo really irrelevant, and again, you need to focus on your expression since you have the ideas, they just don’t flow.

Aboriginal Australian English (AAE) is a complex and rule governed what do you mean? dialect of English spoken widely by Australian Aboriginal people. The variety lies on a continuum, ranging from very light (close to SAE) to very heavy (close to Kriol or other indigenous languages). AAE has varying semantic differences when compared to SAE, examples being ‘Deadly’ meaning ‘excellent’ and ‘Camp’ meaning ‘home’ or ‘house’. The pronouns ‘he’ and ‘him’ are also used for females and inanimate objects. The syntax is also different as in AAE as there is often an absence of auxiliary verbs, for example, ‘We are working’ becomes ‘We workin’’ (with the g-clipping). This should not be seen as simply ‘dropping words out’ but instead “…Systematically changing the whole way in which English is bolted together” – Professor of Linguistics Ian Malcolm irrelevant to the prompt. As with speakers of ethnolects, speakers of AAE can often choose which dialect they use to express a range of identities and thus to suit the situation at hand. The colloquial nature of AAE suggests that Aboriginal culture is ‘easy-going’ and highly values ‘mateship’ allowing rapport to be built among speakers and thus enhancing the in-group solidarity of the community try use more formal language instead of ‘easy-going’AAE is not as respected as much in mainstream society as SAE, however, as with ethnolects, AAE serves an important function for its speakers in that it allows speakers to display one’s identity to society and one’s membership to the Aboriginal community. This, however, often leads to affliction among speakers of AAE, as the competing needs to construct one’s identity through language and also to be taken seriously and provided with equal opportunities in society must be reconciled. AAE is another variety of AE which serves a purpose of allowing speakers to separate themselves from mainstream SAE to express a central part of their identity.

So you started off mildly strong, however; your discussion on attitudes is really irrelevant since it has nothing to do with the prompt. In all three paragraphs, you really missed the mark - you need to discuss three varieties in terms of how they actually constitute AE.

AE is not a single entity, but rather a dynamic and multifaceted group of varieties which display the rich cultural and ethnic landscape of Australia. Examples of such varieties include LAE and AAE, which serve similar functions in that they allow speakers to display their belonging to an exclusive community thereby constructing one’s identity through language, or as linguist Grey Dickson describes it “Like all of us, the googleboxes speak in ways that reflect who they are, where they’ve come from and where they’re going” (on the topic of the TV show ‘Googlebox’). So you have an entire body on SAE, but you don’t mention it in your conclusion  ??? Also, save the quote for the concluding sentence, since your conclusion lacks a final sentence and is therefore incomplete


Overall, I think you’ve failed to address the question - just focus on how they make up AE. Further, you really need more contemporary examples as most of the ones you have used are somewhat old. As such, I’d give it a 6 or 7 out of 15. Note: I did this in a bit of a rush, so please forgive me if there are spelling mistakes and whatnot, and sorry if this sounds really blunt, just don’t have the time to edit it in detail.

Hope this helps  :)


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


mtDNA

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 152
  • Respect: +47
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #260 on: October 04, 2017, 03:40:20 pm »
+1
Hey guys, the following is an AC I wrote based on the 2012 VCAA text. I’d greatly appreciate it if someone could review it (pls be harsh  ;) ) and give it a mark out of 15, and let me know how I can cut it down since 900 words imo is too long for something that should be ~700. Also note that the 3rd body imo is a little weak mainly because I really had no clue what to write for it, so if you have any suggestions to bolster it I’d greatly appreciate it.

Thanks in advance  :)

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

The written transcript of the spoken conversation between Margaret (M) and Joan (J) presents a discussion of their dogs, Bella, Scruffy, and Patch, as well as J’s mascara. Within the verbal exchange, an informal register is utilised, alongside with a casual style, in order to maintain the social purpose of the dialogue: to foster in-group membership and promote equality between the two friends, hence establishing social intimacy. Furthermore, the phatic function of the verbal exchange, which occurs in an open domain on a Melbourne suburban train, is to maintain the fluidity of the conversation between M and J, with M being the dominant interlocutor prompting engagement with J, whilst J being the supportive interlocutor encouraging M to hold the floor. Given the setting, M and J experience an array of non-fluency features within their conversation, thereby evidencing its unscripted and spontaneous nature.

Through the use of an informal register, M and J are able to bolster social rapport and intimacy, thereby fulfilling the social purpose of the conversation. The use of dysphemistic language, which is a salient feature of Australian English, with the expletives “stupid” (76) and “crap” (102) enables J to appeal to M’s national identity, thereby augmenting the positive face needs of M through this expression of this shared national pride. As such, J bolsters in-group solidarity and closes social distance with M, hence contributing to the social purpose of the discourse. Additionally, the use of these expletives, simultaneously with emphatic stress, in a public setting allows J to cement a relaxed tone, thereby reducing the formality of the conversation to encourage equality with M so that they can foster social rapport. Similarly, the implementation of “the Yarra” (1), being a shortened form of the proper noun phrase ‘the Yarra River’, which refers to a locality in Melbourne and requires inference to be understood, promotes an informal register, thereby closing social distance between the two interlocutors. M and J’s mutual understanding of this reduction indicates their shared identity as citizens of Melbourne, thereby allowing M to enhance the positive face needs of J by appealing to her national identity, thus furthering this establishment of in-group membership. Moreover, the employment of complex lexical patterning with the non-Standard variations of the adjective ‘dumb’, such as “dumb-dumb” in line 57 and “dummy” in line 81, allows M to reciprocate this use of informality in order to promote togetherness with J. In this way, M and J are able to embolden equality within the discourse through this use of informal lexis, thus achieving the interactional social purpose of establishing social rapport.

Within the spoken conversation, M adopts a dominant role in progressing the conversation by promoting engagement with J, whilst J acts to support M in holding the floor, thereby enabling the development of a smooth conversation so that the phatic function of the text is achieved. In line 4 and 6, M uses antithesis, whereby M contrasts the singularity of Bella “[getting] out of the water” (4) harmlessly with the plurality of “everyone else” (6) who helped her, only to be inflicted with “scratch[es] in the process” (6). Here, this juxtaposition within the syntactic patterning allows M to add to the entertainment value of her newly initiated topic, thereby promoting engagement with J to support the fluidity of the conversation. In response, J laughs to this exaggeration, hence expressing her interest in the topic so that she encourages M to continue holding the floor, thus appealing to her positive face needs. In a similar fashion, M employs a hyperbolic simile with “it’s as if we’re murdering him” (26) in relation to bathing her dog Scruffy, thereby exaggerating Scruffy’s response to being washed, so that she can keep J interested in the topic, to which J responses with overlapping laughter, indicating her approval of the topic to encourage M to maintain the floor. J’s facilitative role is further evidenced through her use of interrogative tags, such as “she’s good isn’t she?” (52), relinquishing the floor to M and promoting her to develop the discussion in regards to Bella’s independence, hence enabling the fluidity of the conversation to be preserved. However, near the conclusion of the spoken transcript, J takes a dominant role, shifting the topic to mascara she bought from a discount chemist, as seen in lines 91 to 94, where J uses parallelism of simple sentences, as well as elongation of the /IPA/ diphthong in the intensifier “so” (94), in order to emphasise the poor quality of the beauty product, thereby maintaining M’s attention. For the most part of the conversation, M maintains a dominant role whilst J acts as a facilitative interlocutor, hence allowing for a fluid dialogue.

With the informal conversation being conducted on a Melbourne train, M and J undergo a series of non-fluency features which indicate the unprompted nature of the discourse. The false start in line 31, for example, where J begins to ask “so how ol-”, followed by her correction “how big’s Scruffy?” indicates that J may have realised her initial interrogative had the potential to offend, given the negative connotation surrounding the lexeme ‘old’, thereby demonstrating the non-fixed manner of the conversation. Moreover, the occurrences of interruptive overlapping speech, such as in lines 10 and 11, where M mistimes her minimal response “yeah” before J had finished her utterance further indicates the spontaneity of the dialogue. Finally, the elongated pause in line 85 exemplifies the unplanned nature of the conversation as J is thinking of her next utterance to continue the newly initiated topic. As a result of the situational context which the dialogue takes place, M and J’s conversation is consequently inherently plagued with a myriad of non-features, including false starts, interruptive overlapping speech, and pauses, indicating its unscripted nature.


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


EulerFan102

  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 64
  • Respect: +41
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #261 on: October 04, 2017, 06:03:26 pm »
+5
Hey guys, the following is an AC I wrote based on the 2012 VCAA text. I’d greatly appreciate it if someone could review it (pls be harsh  ;) ) and give it a mark out of 15, and let me know how I can cut it down since 900 words imo is too long for something that should be ~700. Also note that the 3rd body imo is a little weak mainly because I really had no clue what to write for it, so if you have any suggestions to bolster it I’d greatly appreciate it.


(heya, here's some comments on your AC  ;D)

The written transcript of the spoken conversation (just say it's a spoken conversation; all spoken texts you'll get will be in the form of a written transcript, but the text itself is a spoken conversation) between Margaret (M) and Joan (J) presents a discussion of their dogs, Bella, Scruffy, and Patch, as well as J’s mascara. Within the verbal exchange, an informal register is utilised (personally I'm not a fan of "utilised", as it sounds a bit too purposeful for choices that can be largely unconscious), alongside with a casual style (style isn't really part of the course, though that may be how you're taught register), in order to maintain the social purpose of the dialogue: to foster in-group membership and promote equality between the two friends, hence establishing social intimacy. Furthermore, the phatic function of the verbal exchange, which occurs in an open domain (perhaps "setting" would be better here, as "domain" means something different in the EngLang course) on a Melbourne suburban train, is to maintain the fluidity of the conversation between M and J, with M being the dominant interlocutor prompting engagement with J, whilst J being the supportive interlocutor encouraging M to hold the floor. Given the setting, M and J experience an array of non-fluency features within their conversation, thereby evidencing its unscripted and spontaneous nature.

Through the use of an informal register, M and J are able to bolster social rapport and intimacy, thereby fulfilling the social purpose of the conversation. The use of dysphemistic language, which is a salient feature of Australian English, with the expletives “stupid” (76) and “crap” (102) enables J to appeal to M’s national identity (I think this is a stretch; just because an Aussie says "stupid" doesn't mean they're trying to show of their Aussie-ness. Instead focus on how taboo/dysphemistic language reflects the relationship between the speakers), thereby augmenting the positive face needs of M through this expression of this shared national pride. As such, J bolsters in-group solidarity and closes social distance with M, [hence contributing to the social purpose of the discourse] (this feels a bit repetitive, as you said a very similar thing earlier). Additionally, the use of these expletives, simultaneously (not needed) with emphatic stress, in a public setting allows J to cement a relaxed tone, thereby reducing the formality of the conversation to encourage equality with M so that they can foster social rapport (okay, this seems like too lengthy a discussion about two particular words a speaker said. While it would be good to mention these, it feels like you're labouring the point a little). Similarly, the implementation (I'm even less of a fan of "implementation" than of "utilise". It makes it sound as if the language is a utensil that they're deliberately employing) of “the Yarra” (1), being a shortened form of the proper noun phrase ‘the Yarra River’, which refers to a locality in Melbourne and requires inference to be understood, promotes an informal register (not sure if I agree with you here; I reckon "the Yarra" doesn't really affect the formality), thereby closing (I think "minimising" or "reducing" would be better choices here) social distance between the two interlocutors. M and J’s mutual understanding of this reduction indicates their shared identity as citizens of Melbourne, thereby allowing M to enhance the positive face needs of J by appealing to her national identity, thus furthering this establishment of in-group membership (again, I think you're over-analysing a single word that someone says. Linking a mention of the Yarra to face needs, national identity and in-group membership just seems too much). Moreover, the employment of complex lexical patterning with the non-Standard variations of the adjective ‘dumb’, such as “dumb-dumb” in line 57 and “dummy” in line 81, allows M to reciprocate this use of informality in order to promote togetherness with J. In this way, M and J are able to embolden equality (embolden equality? That sounds a bit strange to me) within the discourse through this use of informal lexis, thus achieving the interactional social purpose of establishing social rapport. (Some general feedback for the paragraph: you need to include more examples. For instance, if you're talking about informality, give plenty of quotes from the transcript of things that decrease the formality. A lengthy paragraph about 3/4 short quotes just makes it seem like you're cherry-picking)

Within the spoken conversation, M adopts a dominant role in progressing the conversation by promoting engagement with J, whilst J acts to support M in holding the floor, thereby enabling the development of a smooth conversation so that the phatic function of the text is achieved (this sentence seems overly long; try breaking it up). In line 4 and 6, M uses antithesis (to be honest, I just don't think it's an example of antithesis. The sentences have a somewhat different structure, and are not conveying opposite ideas. Antithesis is much more common in formal texts, where the writer/speaker is trying to show off their linguistic prowess), whereby M contrasts the singularity of Bella “[getting] out of the water” (4) harmlessly with the plurality of “everyone else” (6) who helped her, only to be inflicted with “scratch[es] in the process” (6). Here, this juxtaposition within the syntactic patterning allows M to add to the entertainment value of her newly initiated topic, thereby promoting engagement with J to support the fluidity of the conversation (I haven't seen a mention of conversational fluidity before, so it sounds a little strange to me). In response, J laughs to this exaggeration, hence expressing her interest in the topic so that she encourages M to continue holding the floor, thus appealing to her positive face needs. In a similar fashion, M employs a hyperbolic simile with “it’s as if we’re murdering him” (26) in relation to bathing her dog Scruffy, thereby exaggerating Scruffy’s response to being washed, so that she can keep J interested in the topic, to which J responses with overlapping laughter, indicating her approval of the topic (this discussion of laughter seems very similar to the previous one, so omitting this one or grouping them together would be good) to encourage M to maintain the floor (again, this sentence seems overly long). J’s facilitative role is further evidenced through her use of interrogative tags, such as “she’s good isn’t she?” (52), relinquishing the floor to M and promoting her to develop the discussion in regards to Bella’s independence, hence enabling the fluidity of the conversation to be preserved. However, near the conclusion of the spoken transcript, J takes a dominant role, shifting the topic to mascara she bought from a discount chemist, as seen in lines 91 to 94, where J uses parallelism of simple sentences, as well as elongation of the /IPA/ diphthong in the intensifier “so” (94), in order to emphasise the poor quality of the beauty product, thereby maintaining M’s attention (another long sentence). For the most part of the conversation, M maintains a dominant role whilst J acts as a facilitative interlocutor, hence allowing for a fluid dialogue. (it would be good to mention minimal responses in here too)

With the informal conversation being conducted on a Melbourne train, [M and J undergo a series of non-fluency features] (this sounds strange; can speakers undergo a feature of language?)  which indicate the unprompted (do you mean "impromptu"?) nature of the discourse. The false start in line 31, for example, where J begins to ask “so how ol-”, followed by her correction “how big’s Scruffy?” indicates that J may have realised her initial interrogative had the potential to offend, given the negative connotation surrounding the lexeme ‘old’, thereby demonstrating the non-fixed manner of the conversation. Moreover, the occurrences of interruptive overlapping speech, such as in lines 10 and 11, where M mistimes her minimal response “yeah” before J had finished her utterance further indicates the spontaneity of the dialogue. Finally, the elongated pause in line 85 exemplifies the unplanned nature of the conversation as J is thinking of her next utterance to continue the newly initiated topic. As a result of the situational context which the dialogue takes place, M and J’s conversation is consequently inherently plagued with a myriad of non-features, including false starts, interruptive overlapping speech, and pauses, indicating its unscripted nature. (while it may warrant mentioning, I don't feel like the unscripted nature of the conversation is worth analysing in this amount of detail. Non-fluency features are great to discuss and link back to larger concepts like register, social purpose, relationship between the speakers)

(There are plenty of interesting things happening in the text that you didn't mention: turn-taking, topic management, minimal responses. These are great to analyse and then relate to the relationship between the speakers. Also, your AC would benefit from a much deeper discussion of the social purposes and register, with more examples from the text.)

kingy123

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 20
  • Respect: 0
  • School: Camberwell Grammer
  • School Grad Year: 2015
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #262 on: October 08, 2017, 07:20:21 pm »
0
Hey guys! I was wondering if some one could give my essay a read and give me some feedback and a mark out of 15.
Thanks.

Topic:"You can't judge me on what I say and write, or how i express myself" - Discuss

Our language is an integral tool used to reflect many aspects of our identity, as such, it can be changed depending on how we wish to be seen by others. Certain language choices we make, both consciously and subconsciously , highlight our individual attitudes and beliefs. Furthermore, our use of Jargon and the way we speak can be used to  establish solidarity within a particular group and highlight one's expertise in a certain field. Ultimately however, it is the context of the situation we are in , which dictate the most appropriate language choices one should use. The language we use defines us and enables others to gain an insight into who you are and what you believe in.

Through language choices we can highlight to others our individual attitudes and beliefs. As a result, lexis we use can highlight intrinsic personal beliefs which may appeal to some while irritating others. In a recent speech to parliament, Senator Pauline Hanson of Australia’s far right One Nation party described the religion of Islam using the metaphor “a disease that has to be vaccinated”  . In doing this, Hanson garners covert prestige from fellow members of her party who share the same views by emphasising her solidarity in sharing negative beliefs of Islam. On the other hand, Labour senator Sam Dastyari, labeled hanson with the negatively connoted adjectives ‘ bigot’ and ‘xenophobe’, in response to her comments. Opposing beliefs regarding the same topic between Hanson and Dastyari led to losing prestige in the eyes of Dastyari and those who share the same view. This highlights how attitudes and beliefs shown through our language influences how others view you.

Our knowledge of particular fields and the groups to which we belong to can be assumed through how we communicate. Jargon is often used to highlight our expertise of a particular topic and garner prestige among peers as such knowledge may not be possessed by themselves. Astrophysicist Neil Degrasse Tyson in a recent interview with Lateline on the ABC network regarding the publication of his new book on the topic of astrophysics uses jargonistic lexis such as “cosmic”, “ gravity” and “quantum mechanics” to highlight his knowledge of the field of astrophysics and garner prestige from both the interviewer and the audience watching at home who may not possess much understanding of the field. Also, this further promotes his aspiration at the time of advertising his book as it shows him to be a reliable source of information from such a field. Additionally, One uses the way they speak to identify with a particular group, which influences how others views them.Stand up comedian Dave Hughes is well-known for his strong Broad Australian accent, evident through his emphasis on the diphthong in mate, pronouncing it as /meit/ and in his elongation of the vowel ‘smart’ pronouncing it as /sma=rt/. As broad speakers are typically associated with friendliness and sociability, hughes is able to create an identity of being a down to earth Australian ‘bloke’  and signal his membership to that group. This aids his career aspirations as a comedian as he is perceived as being more genuine and relatable. Through the way we speak and the language we use, an identity which invokes an opinion from those around us is often established.

Finally, it is the context of the situation which dictates what language choices fellow interlocutors or audience members find appropriate or inappropriate. Feminist blog Dubuque , described the most important quality of scottish minister NIcola Sturgeon as her ability to ‘vary her style and tone to suit the purposes of the moment’. In the Australian context, this quality is evident in the language of Australian Deputy Prime minister Barnaby Joyce.Joyce employed lexis with sophisticated and authoritative connotations such as ‘unification’, ‘perilous’ and ‘ubiquitous’ during his first parliamentary speech.In doing this, he garners respect from his peers by  portraying an identity of a well-spoken, educated intellectual,being appropriate person for the position he holds.In contrast , his recent appearance at the Nationals Party Federal Conference, he employed more informal language, such the colloquialism “George is a good mate” in reference to MP George Christensen, or the informal metaphor “[they’re] just a short-term sugar hit” in reference to jobs related to renewable energy. In this new setting, most audience members are working class supporters of his party. By using more informal language, he creates an image which is more relatable and sincere to his audience, which in turn helps maintain their support of Joyce. It is the context of the situation we are in which influences how the language we use is perceived.

As author Noam Shpancer once said, “context determines the meaning of things”. It is the context we are in which influences how we are perceived from the language we use. Although particular individual identity or membership to a group may be portrayed, the situational and cultural factors which surrounds are language choices influence whether can “ judge me on what I say and write” .

mtDNA

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 152
  • Respect: +47
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #263 on: October 08, 2017, 08:55:29 pm »
+6
Hey Kingy123, below are a few comments on the essay (just a side note: we got the exact same prompt for our trial exam which was derived from boo book).

Topic:"You can't judge me on what I say and write, or how i express myself" - Discuss


Our language is an integral tool used to reflect many aspects of our identity. As such, it can be changed depending on how we wish to be seen by others. Certain language choices we make, both consciously and subconsciously, highlight our individual attitudes and beliefs. Furthermore, our use of Jargon and the way we speak can be used to establish solidarity within a particular group and highlight one's expertise in a certain field. Ultimately However, it is ultimately the context of the situation we are in which dictates the most appropriate language choices one should use. The language we use defines us and enables others to gain an insight into who you are and what you believe in.

Just a few notes to improve the intro: I would try link it more closely to the prompt, since atm it seems as more of a pre-written identity introduction. Be cautious of this, since examiners are pretty strict with this and will deduct serious marks if they accuse you of plainly memorising an essay for the exam. To avoid this, you could simply repeat segments of the prompt in a sentence or two (perhaps with synonyms), or change around your arguments to suit the prompt - that being the fact that we can’t judge (if you agree) one’s language choices. More specifically, you make a brief note on prescriptivism/descriptivism, or you may leave this for the main paragraphs.

Through our language choices, we can highlight to others our individual attitudes and beliefs to others. As a result, the lexis we use can highlight illustrate intrinsic personal beliefs which may appeal to some while irritating consider another word choice others This would be a great place to mention judgement, thereby showing a clear link to the prompt. In a recent speech to parliament, Senator Pauline Hanson of Australia’s far right One Nation party described the religion of Islam using the metaphor “a disease that has to be vaccinated” (and they wanted to amend the Racial Discrimination Act, smh...). In doing this, Hanson garners covert prestige from fellow members of her party who share the same views by emphasising her solidarity in sharing negative beliefs of Islam. On the other hand, Labour senator Sam Dastyari labeled hanson with the negatively connoted adjectives ‘ bigot’ and ‘xenophobe’ in response to her comments. Opposing beliefs regarding the same topic between Hanson and Dastyari led to losing prestige in the eyes of Dastyari and those who share the same view. This highlights how attitudes and beliefs shown through our language influences how others view you good reference back to the prompt.

So this was a pretty strong body, I guess the only feedback would be to continuously refer back to the prompt to ensure you stay on track and show the examiner that you’re answering the specific question. Apart from that, it was really good (loved the example  ;D ), so good job!

Our knowledge of particular semantic? fields and the groups to which we belong to can be assumed through how we communicate consider rephrasing this sentence as it is a little odd; perhaps try: “The social groups to which we belong can be assumed through our language repertoire, specifically with our knowledge and use of niche semantic fields.". Jargon is often used to highlight our expertise of a particular topic and garner prestige among peers as such knowledge may not be possessed by themselves. Astrophysicist Neil Degrasse Tyson in a recent interview with Lateline on the ABC network regarding the publication of his new book on the topic of astrophysics uses jargonistic lexis such as “cosmic”, “gravitynot too sure whether gravity would be considered jargonistic and “quantum mechanics” to highlight his knowledge of the field of astrophysics and garner prestige from both the interviewer and the audience watching at home who may not possess much understanding of the field avoid repetition. Also, this further promotes his aspiration at the time of advertising his book as it shows him to be a reliable source of information from such a field. Additionally, One uses the way they speak to identify with a particular group, which influences how others views them. Stand up comedian Dave Hughes is well-known for his strong Broad Australian accent, evident through his emphasis on the diphthong in mate, pronouncing it as /meit/ and in his elongation of the vowel ‘smart’ pronouncing it as /sma=rt/. As broad speakers are typically associated with friendliness and sociability, hughes is able to create an identity of being a down to earth Australian ‘bloke’ and signal his membership to that group. This aids his career aspirations as a comedian as he is perceived as being more genuine and relatable. Through the way we speak and the language we use, an identity which invokes an opinion from those around us is often established.

So in this paragraph, perhaps base it on how overt and covert norms allow members of society to inherently judge us - the first example indicating the effect of jargon in establishing a professional and educated identity to gain overt prestige, indicating how one judges based on another’s lexical choice, while the other example indicates how the response garnered from one’s appeal to covert norms demonstrates how society judges us based on our language choices. As such, the only improvement you need to make here is to link it more closely with the prompt.

Finally, It is the context of the situation which dictates what language choices fellow interlocutors or audience members find appropriate or inappropriate. Feminist blog Dubuque described the most important quality of scottish minister NIcola Sturgeon as her ability to ‘vary her style and tone to suit the purposes of the moment’. In the Australian context, this quality is evident in the language of Australian Deputy Prime minister Barnaby Joyce. Joyce employed lexis with sophisticated and authoritative connotations such as ‘unification’, ‘perilous’ and ‘ubiquitous’ during his first parliamentary speech. In doing this, he garners respect from his peers by portraying an identity of a well-spoken, educated intellectual, being appropriate consider word choice here person for the position he holds. In contrast, his recent appearance at the Nationals Party Federal Conference, he employed more informal language, such the colloquialism “George is a good mate” in reference to MP George Christensen, or the informal metaphor “[they’re] just a short-term sugar hit” in reference to jobs related to renewable energy. In this new setting, most audience members are working class supporters of his party. By using more informal language, he creates an image which is more relatable and sincere to his audience, which in turn helps maintain their support of Joyce. It is the context of the situation we are in which influences how the language we use is perceived.

Again, make explicit links to the prompt regarding judgements

As author Noam Shpancer once said, “context determines the meaning of things”. It is the context we are in which influences how we are perceived from the language we use. Although particular individual identity or membership to a group may be portrayed, the situational and cultural factors which surrounds are language choices influence whether can “ judge me on what I say and write” .


Overall, the essay is pretty good, and I like the points you have made. To improve though, at times there were some really weak links back to the prompt of the essay, so you should really hone in on this (particularly for the intro which really sounded like it could be applied for any identity-related question). Additionally, I think it’d be good to spend one paragraph dedicated on the contrary view, that one can’t (or should not) judge another for their language choices - this is also a good change to discuss prescriptivism and descriptivism, which are really the heart of the prompt. Another point which you may consider discussing is how the use of non-Standard language is more advantageous than the Standard in certain contexts, proving the point that one’s language should not be judged.

As a result, I would say the essay is around 11 to 13 out of 15 (good job!), mainly due to the fact that there were weak links back to the prompt, and imo, you didn’t necessarily address all the elements of the prompt. If you addressed the prompt more closely, then I’d award it a confident 13, then if you added more info regarding attitudes to language, then that would boost it to a 14, and potentially a 15  :D 


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


kingy123

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 20
  • Respect: 0
  • School: Camberwell Grammer
  • School Grad Year: 2015
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #264 on: October 08, 2017, 09:33:18 pm »
0
Thanks for the feedback mtDNA, will take note!

Jackl454

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Respect: 0
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #265 on: October 16, 2017, 10:58:34 pm »
0
Hey guys, would love some feedback and a mark on this essay I have written. Please be harsh I'm pretty keen to fix everything I can before the exam.

Topic – What place does formal language have in contemporary Australian society?

The language we use exists on a spectrum of formality, ranging from very formal to very informal. Different registers are favoured in different contexts and domains, and serve different purposes. While contemporary Australian society is seemingly moving away from formality, favouring an informal covert norms in a wider range of domains, the formal variant of English still has a prominent role in certain situations and modern day language use.

Particular domains, contexts and professions require use of formal language. Formal language conforms to the standard and carries overt prestige and it is for these reasons that it is used in semantic fields and occupations that are associated with high prestige. As David Crystal said, “the closer [those in certain professions] can make their spoken style conform to the written standard, the less they will attract criticism of being ‘careless’, ‘lazy’ or ‘sloppy’ ”, when referencing jobs such as “radio announcers, political spokespersons, university professors and courtroom lawyers”.  As these have traditional ties with high overt prestige, Crystal identifies that prescriptivists expect a formal spoken style from such professions. This is exampled by stimulus c, an address by a school principal which utilises elevated lexemes, as seen in sentences such as “extend a very warm welcome to our distinguished guests and alumnus”, to portray prestige and formality. While schools are typically fairly informal places, the position of principal still has ties to prestige, and thus must be shown through the use of a formal register. On a broader scale, this shows a continued use of and need for a formal register in certain contexts and domains in contemporary society.

Just as there are some domains that require formal language, many situations favour the use of an informal register. Informal language is renowned for lowering social distance. Variations from the standard and formal variants of English are what form covert norms between people. These covert norms can act as shibboleths, markers of an in group and out group, and therefore build solidarity between users, consistent with Clare Kramsch’s statement, “members of a social group can draw pride and personal strength from using the same language”. Not only can informalities unite users, but also allows particular individuals to establish personal and group identities through use of language that varies from standard and overt norms. In the Australian context, the broad Australian identity has stereotyped covert norms, such as common use of swearing and greetings such as ‘G’day’ or ‘Mate’. The prevalence of these informalities allows Australians to regularly reduce social distance, and create the characterised laid back and relaxed identity. These informalities often appeal to positive face, as the widespread use of covert norms is inclusive in nature. As formal language often increases social distance, when used in casual contexts it lacks inclusivity and can threaten positive face, and is thus is rarely seen in such contexts. Because of its ability to lower social distance and form identity, informal language has clear prevalence in modern day society.

In Australian society the use of informal language is becoming more abundant in the public domain. While it was once reserved for formal language, due to an association with high prestige, there is a regular use of covert norms in the Australian public domain. Examples of this include usage of swearing, as seen by Carrie Bickmore, when she dedicated her Logie win to “anyone going through a shit time right now”. This use of a characteristic Australian covert norm lowers the social distance between her and her audience, which therefore allows her to build solidarity with the audience in an attempt to be liked more. As Dr Evan Kidd, studying Australian slang at La Trobe University, said, “By using slang, celebrities are trying to align themselves with ‘Mr and Mrs Average Australian’ “. While there is an increase in the amount of informal language, formal language still has some precedence in the public domain. Stronger and objectively harsher covert norms such as usage of “fuck” and “cunt” have still been kept from mainstream media, due to the continuing ties with prestige the media must adhere to. As this is the case, there is still a place for the use of formal language in the public domain of Australian society, even if it is diminishing as a result of increased use of informal language.

Both the informal and formal variety of English has a role in certain domains of contemporary Australian society. As David Crystal maintains, “Anyone who is unable to express English formally with control and precision is at a serious disadvantage … but anyone who lacks the ability to handle the informal range of English usage is seriously disadvantaged too”

mtDNA

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 152
  • Respect: +47
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #266 on: October 18, 2017, 09:02:55 pm »
0
Heya, I’d greatly appreciate it if someone could critique my essay and give it a mark out of 15  ;D - thanks in advance!

Prompt: By taking a range of examples from the different subsystems of language, discuss how at least one particular group or individual has constructed their identity. Explain the range of attitudes that arise in response to this constructed identity.

Our linguistic repertoire, being a product of our central dogmata, inherently acts as a marker in defining who we are and the social groups to which we do or do not belong. In this way, linguistic shibboleths are constructed based on our ideologies, synthesising a myriad of language palettes for specific speech communities so that those who are able to conform to these highly individualistic language conventions, whether it be through conscious or subconscious means, can perform the associated identities. As such, the specific language features that we employ enables “members of a social group [to] draw personal strength and pride from using the same language” (Clare Kramsch), thereby bolstering in-group membership and solidarity. However, opposition to these idiosyncratic language usages arise because of their ability in marking group boundaries which inherently excludes the out-group. In this sense, language acts as a stage in showcasing our ascribed and avowed multiple identities to reflect the cultures and sub-cultures we wish to participate in, as seen with the formation of ethnolects, age-based sociolects, and political-based idiolects.

Our linguistic idiosyncrasies generally conform to our sense of ethnic identity, whereby interlocutors subconsciously or consciously employ language strategies to reflect their cultural backgrounds. Subsequent to the migration boom and the conclusion of the ‘cultural cringe’ movement, Australia developed a sense of independence and hence the majority of the populace began to embrace and celebrate the linguistic diversity proposed by ethnolects. Because of this cultural osmosis, there is now a myriad of ethnicities, as shown by the 2016 data which indicated that half of the Australian population has at least one parent who was born overseas, and that over 300 different languages are used within Australia. As such, each distinct speech community uses borrowings in order to perform their ethnic and multicultural identities. For instance, members in the Islamic speech community are able to utilise the borrowing “halal snack pack”, which was also named a runner-up for Word of the Year in the Macquarie Dictionary, in order to exemplify and construct their religious and ethnic identities, as PhD research candidate Josh Clothier explains that those who use ethnolects “express links with their heritage communities”. Although the majority of the Australian populace exhibit a descriptivist attitude towards these language usages, there exists a minority opting for a more prescriptivist viewpoint to the employment of non-Standard features of ethnolects to construct one’s identity. For instance, the newly proposed language proficiency test requires immigrants to attain “university-level” (Tony Burke) Standard Australian English – this diminishes the diversity of ethnolects, thereby lessening the frequency of non-Standard language in society. In so doing, members who share a mutual L2 are restricted in their ability to exemplify and perform their multicultural identities through code-mixing. Although ethnolects enable those who share an ethnic identity to form in-group solidarity, dichotomous attitudes towards this non-Standard language usage exist within Australia.

In addition, the conscious indexation of one’s identity can be readily achieved through their choices of language, thereby marking the social groups to which we belong. In regards to age-based sociolects, teenagers can manipulate their linguistic choices to construct a distinctive variety of language that asserts their youthful, amiable, and rebellious identity. For instance, the notable ‘Spongemock’ meme, in which an imperative sentence given by an authority is followed by a mockery of the aforementioned statement by a noncompliant listener through the use of non-Standard orthography, enables teenagers to gain covert prestige by utilising a lexicon distinct from the Standard, thus allowing them to “keep in with their peers” (Philippa Law). One such meme ridicules the recent ‘no’ campaign advertisement against marriage equality by writing “iT’s oK To VoTE nO”. With this non-Standard use of capitalisation, youths promote in-group solidarity between teenagers via the indexation of a progressive political identity, whilst excluding those of a conservative mindset. This allows for inclusivity amongst teenagers to lower social distance and enhances the positive face needs of other teenagers with similar ideologies, whilst acting as a “barbed wire for older generations” (John Sutherland) who are potentially unable to decipher the semantic implications of these non-Standard usages or attain opposing views. As such, those who form the out-group garner resentment towards these distinctive sociolects. Through the use of style, teenagers are able to reflect their rebellious identity and elicit a sense of inclusiveness among other teens by promoting social intimacy and in-group solidarity.

Through the use of inclusive and exclusive language choices within the realm of politics, political parties are able to signal their associations to specific societal communities or views, thereby manipulating and redesigning their multiple identities to advance their political agendas. Within the marriage equality debate, the dichotomy between inclusivity and exclusivity is displayed, particularly in regards to the strategic lexical choices which aim to divide potential voters based on their ideologies. For instance, the use of the noun phrase “marriage equality” by the Australian Labor Party attains euphemistic properties as it aims to highlight the equal nature between homosexual and heterosexual couples, thereby reinforcing the ALP’s mantra of equality. In this way, the left-wing political party can construct an identity reflecting their progressive ideologies, hence appealing to minority voters, specifically from the LGBTIQ+ community. In comparison, the noun phrase “gay marriage”, which is used by the Australian Conservatives, implies that this love is different; that it is connoted with abnormality. Here, prominent orators including Senator Cory Bernardi, synthesise an ‘us-and-them’ rhetoric to form a sense of othering, thereby positioning members of the LGBTIQ+ community in the out-group, whilst appealing to conservative voters through this establishment of a traditionalist political identity. As a result of this division, negative attitudes arise towards the language usages from each side of the debate. For instance, ‘yes’ voters were swift to lambaste the Australian Christian Lobby when they likened the children of same-sex couples to ‘the stolen generation’, with Senator Penny Wong responding, “I object, as do every person who cares about children”. In this sense, our political views we wish to express through our lexicon aid us in creating our multiple identities, in turn garnering opposition from those who disagree.

The language we use acts as a stage in designing and performing our avowed and ascribed multiple identities in order to showcase the cultures and sub-cultures we wish to participate in. However, the construction and exhibition of our group identities inadvertently forms a barrier for the out-group, hence harvesting resentment and disagreement within wider society. 


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


mtDNA

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 152
  • Respect: +47
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #267 on: October 22, 2017, 01:41:40 pm »
0
Just thought I’d add another one: as always, pls be harsh with your comments and give it a mark out of 15  :) - thank you!

Prompt: ‘Jargon has two distinct functions: the primary function is to serve as a technical or specialist language. The other is to promote in-group solidarity: to exclude those people who do not use the jargon.’
How does jargon (professional or popular) create cohesiveness within a speech community? Support your response with specific examples.


Our linguistic repertoire, being a product of our central dogmata, inherently acts as a marker in defining who we are and the speech communities to which we do and do not belong. In this way, jargonistic items that constitute the lexicon of these social groups synthesises linguistic shibboleths, so only those who are able to conform to these highly individualistic language palettes form the in-group. As such, group boundaries are defined, allowing for the construction of cohesiveness within the speech community through the establishment of in-group solidarity. While “jargon facilitates communication on one hand … [it] erects quite successful communication barriers on the other hand” (linguist Kate Burridge), excluding those in the out-group, thereby creating cohesion by emphasising who belongs. Moreover, jargon creates a succinct and precise way of communicating amongst group members by acting as a specialist language, erecting an efficient mechanism of communication to allow cohesion to be enhanced. In this sense, jargon accentuates harmony amongst group members, whilst distancing those who form the out-group.

Through the employment of jargon specific to a speech community, a language user can signal the cultures and sub-cultures they wish to participate in. In this way, members of the speech community can synthesise in-group solidarity, as linguist Clare Kramsch explains, “members of a social group draw personal strength and pride from using the same language”. Jargon pertaining to the realm of Stan-twitter, a facet of regular Twitter which comprises of fandoms that praise popular figures, as represented by the pre-modifier ‘stan’ which is a portmanteau of the nouns ‘stalker’ and ‘fan’, enables members of the LGBTIQ+ community to take pride in their sexual orientation and gender identity. With respect to the marriage equality debate, one may post the jargonistic phrase “my poor wig” on their account to display appreciation towards a public figure’s support for the change, whilst the sentence fragment “drag her” could be used to signal one’s dismissal for those who support traditional marriage. Such usage was observed subsequent to Matthew Canavan’s comment “grow a spine” towards the homosexual community in their plea to push for a parliamentary vote, as LGBTIQ+ members of these fandoms took to stan-twitter to lambaste the National MP. In this fashion, the use of jargon allows both closeted and open youths to enhance their positive face needs by appealing to their sexual identity, thereby promoting inclusivity and in-group solidarity as linguist David Crystal explains “[jargon is a] chief linguistic element that shows togetherness”. Jargon acts as a linguistic agent in flagging who belongs, allowing an interlocutor to foster social rapport, ultimately establishing cohesiveness within a speech community.

Whilst jargon promotes inclusivity within a speech community, such language will inherently mark group boundaries, forming an out-group. The language of politics is particularly notorious for this use of jargon which may act to deliberately obscure and confound those who do cannot decipher their semantic meanings. With respect to the 2017 Federal Budget, jargonistic terms from the semantic field of economics, including “deficit”, “negative gearing”, and “superannuation concessions”, were found. This calculated choice of language from the Liberal MP Scott Morrison, Treasurer for the Coalition, was used purposefully so that Morrison could showcase an identity manifesting intellectualism and professionalism; however, the general Australian public who could not comprehend what was written were swift to take to social media to lambaste the Treasurer’s use of this language, as “unless you’re a member of a clique, it’s gibberish” (Steven Pinker). Therefore, the use of jargon “erect[ed] quite successful communication barriers” (Burridge) for the Australian populace, thus placing them in the out-group, whilst fostering in-group membership among members of the public who are familiar with this financial jargon. Through this manipulation of jargon, cohesiveness is created because it positions members of a speech community in their place by deliberately marking group boundaries.

Jargon plays a pivotal role in acting as a specialist language – professions and interest groups will converse with jargon since interlocutors involved in a verbal exchange will comprehend this technical language, as linguist Ilana Muschin explains, “one person’s jargon is another person’s vocabulary”. As such, cohesion is constructed as jargon increases the efficiency of communication. For instance, statisticians would use jargonistic noun phrases including “null hypothesis”, “alternate hypothesis”, “type one error”, and “type two error” as these reduce the lexical density of their conversations, since it is simpler to say that ‘a type 2 error has occurred’ instead of ‘the average proposed by a company, which is actually false, was incorrectly deemed to be accurate’. In this fashion, communication is made quicker and simpler through the use of jargon and hence ensures cohesiveness because unnecessary explanations are omitted from verbal interactions, as linguist James Gingell argues “[jargon] can be useful for people as a shortcut to communicating complex concepts”.   

Within society, jargon is helpful in synthesising cohesiveness as it not only acts as a technical language which accentuates the brevity of communication, but also defines ground margins – positioning ourselves in or out of a social group. In this way, jargon is an effective language tool which fulfils the many requirements that members of a speech community attain.



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


sadcats_club

  • Victorian
  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Respect: +1
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #268 on: October 24, 2017, 07:30:30 pm »
+4
Prompt: By taking a range of examples from the different subsystems of language, discuss how at least one particular group or individual has constructed their identity. Explain the range of attitudes that arise in response to this constructed identity.

Our linguistic repertoire, being a product of our central dogmata,interesting word choices inherently acts as a marker in defining who we are and the social groups to which we do or do not belong. In this way, linguistic shibboleths are constructed based on our ideologies, synthesisingwhat exactly synthesises? the shibboleths, or our ideologies? a myriad of language palettes for specific speech communities so that those who are able to conform to these highly individualistic language conventions, (whether it be through conscious or subconscious means), can performto me, "performing" an identity sounds a bit strange but it may not to you, maybe project an identity?the associated identities.the bracketed phrase in redmakes the sentence a little too long and hard to read As such, the specific language features that we employ enables “members of a social group [to] draw personal strength and pride from using the same language” (Clare Kramsch), thereby bolstering in-group membership and solidarity. However, opposition to these idiosyncratic language usages arise because of their ability in marking group boundaries which inherently excludes the out-group. the exclusive value of language varieties is indeed one attitude towards varieties, but this is not the only negative attitude, also maybe talk about some positive attitudes as well?In this sense, language acts as a stage in showcasing our ascribed and avowed multiple identities to reflect the cultures and sub-cultures you do a lot of "x and x" in your writing, and  here, you don't need "sub-cultures"; maybe keep track of how many times you use the constructionwe wish to participate in, as seen with the formation of ethnolects, age-based sociolects, and political-based idiolects.

Our linguistic idiosyncrasies generally conform to our sense of ethnic identity, whereby interlocutors subconsciously or consciously employ language strategies to reflect their cultural backgrounds. niceSubsequent to the migration boom and the conclusion of the ‘cultural cringe’ movement, Australia developed a sense of independence and hence the majority of the populace began to embrace and celebrate the linguistic diversity proposed by ethnolects.There are a lot of unsubstianted claims in this such as "conclusion of the cultural cringe movement", I would not say something like this. Instead, hedge such a definite claim if you need to. Because of this cultural osmosis, there is now a myriad of ethnicities, as shown by the 2016 data which indicated that half of the Australian population has at least one parent who was born overseas, and that over 300 different languages are used within Australia. This little intro of information did not contribute to the prompt enough to justify its length, always think to yourself when writing/reading "is this really helpful and relevant"?For the census example, I believe the 2016 results came out in 2017, so quote this somewhere when introducing your example(there is an sbs article about this posted mid-17 you can find)As such, each distinct speech community uses borrowings in order to perform their ethnic and multicultural identities. For instance, members in the Islamic speech community are able to utilise the borrowing “halal snack pack”, I am not sure this is a centerpiece of the Islamic/Arabic (ethnolect?); it's a term used by a very wide range of Australians, and lacks that sense of exclusivity and cultural significance. which was also named a runner-up for Word of the Year in the Macquarie Dictionary, again, this was announced early 17 so you can mention it for the examiners and their obsession with modern examples :^)in order to exemplify and construct their religious and ethnic identities,as PhD research candidate Josh Clothier explains that those who use ethnolects “express links with their heritage communities”. So, I'd say instead of giving all your analysis of one example in one sentence, split it up a little so that you can really analyse it deeply for a higher score. Although the majority of the Australian populace exhibit a descriptivist attitude towards these language usages, perhaps substantiate this a little OR elaborate on the extent and 'content' of their descriptivism just a little. Do they not care, do they appreciate them as valid expressions of cultural identity?there exists a minority opting for a more prescriptivist viewpoint to the employment of non-Standard features of ethnolects to construct one’s identity. For instance, the newly proposed language proficiency test requires immigrants to attain “university-level” (Tony Burke) Standard Australian English – this diminishes the diversity of ethnolects, thereby lessening the frequency of non-Standard language in society. In so doingdoing so?, members who share a mutual L2Hopefully EL isn't like Biology where using 'non-defined' abbreviations are penalised :'( are restricted in their ability to exemplify and perform their multicultural identities through code-mixing. Although ethnolects enable those who share an ethnic identity to form in-group solidarity, dichotomous attitudes towards this non-Standard language usage exist within Australia.

In addition, the conscious indexation of one’s identity can be readily achieved through their choices of language, thereby marking the social groups to which we belong. In regards to age-based sociolects, teenagers can manipulate their linguistic choices to construct a distinctive variety of language that asserts their youthful, amiable, and rebellious identity. For instance, the notable ‘Spongemock’ meme, in which an imperative sentence given by an authority is followed by a mockery of the aforementioned statement by a noncompliant listener through the use of non-Standard orthography, enables teenagers to gain covert prestige by utilising a lexicon distinct from the Standard, thus allowing them to “keep in with their peers” (Philippa Law).I'd say the quote is more pertinent to the more lexical(slang) dimensions of teenspeak, not sure though One such meme ridicules the recent ‘no’ campaign advertisement against marriage equality by writing “iT’s oK To VoTE nO”. With this non-Standard use of capitalisation, youths promote in-group solidarity between teenagers via the indexation of a progressive political identity, whilst excluding those of a conservative mindset.This explanation has to do with the specific meme, but it might also imply progressive/conservative politics is inherent to the construction, which it is not. This allows for inclusivity amongst teenagers to lower social distance and enhances the positive face needs of other teenagers with similar ideologies, whilst acting as a “barbed wire for older generations” (John Sutherland) who are potentially unable to decipher the semantic implications of these non-Standard usages or attain opposing views. As such, those who form the out-group garner resentment towards these distinctive sociolects. I'm sure you could add in a little example for this by finding a comment by an older person conveying their dislikeThrough the use of style, teenagers are able to reflect their rebellious identity and elicit a sense of inclusiveness among other teens by promoting social intimacy and in-group solidarity. If you wanted, I feel another dimension of the teen sociolect could also be discussed well here,(if you have time) so as to not have all your analysis focused on the political meme

Through the use of inclusive and exclusive language choices within the realm of politics, political parties are able to signal their associations to specific societal communities or views, thereby manipulating and redesigning their multiple identities to advance their political agendas. Within the marriage equality debate, the dichotomy between inclusivity and exclusivity is displayed, particularly in regards to the strategic lexical choices which aim to divide potential voters based on their ideologies. For instance, the use of the noun phrase “marriage equality” by the Australian Labor Party attains euphemistic propertiesgood pickup, and subsequent analysis within the cultural context. Maybe also include the key term 'social purpose'? In tandem with this, discuss the Australian value of egalitarianism and its relation to how identity was constructed with this noun phrase? and ''? as it aims to highlight the equal nature between homosexual and heterosexual couples, thereby reinforcing the ALP’s mantra of equality. In this way, the left-wing political party can construct an identity reflecting their progressive ideologies, hence appealing to minority voters, specifically from the LGBTIQ+ community. In comparison, the noun phrase nice metalanguage“gay marriage”, which is used by the Australian Conservatives, implies that this love is different; that it is connoted with abnormality. Here, prominent orators including Senator Cory Bernardi, synthesise an ‘us-and-them’ rhetoric to form a sense of othering, thereby positioning members of the LGBTIQ+ community in the out-group, whilst appealing to conservative voters through this establishment of a traditionalist political identity. Give a quote from him here.As a result of this division, negative attitudes arise towards the language usages from each side of the debate. For instance, ‘yes’ voters were swift to lambaste the Australian Christian Lobby when they likened the children of same-sex couples to ‘the stolen generation’, with Senator Penny Wong responding, “I object, as do every person who cares about children”.This is a good example but a little more analysis is needed; this would perhaps pertain to the deeply rooted meaning that "stolen generation" has to Australians, and how, as a result, a disrespectful identity was projected? In this sense, our political views we wish to express through our lexicon aid us in creating our multiple identities, in turn garnering opposition from those who disagree.

The language we use acts as a stage in designing and performing our avowed and ascribed multiple identities in order to showcase the cultures and sub-cultures we wish to participate in. However, the construction and exhibition of our group identities inadvertently forms a barrier for the out-group, hence harvesting resentment and disagreement within wider society.This is a good place to finish up with a quote instead of leaving it on a final note concerning out-groups, which are not the most pertinent conclusion to the prompt

-There are other negative attitudes that you could have discussed re. prescriptivism, such as their belief some varieties of language are 'incorrect', 'wrong', and 'improper'. There are such attitudes towards teenspeak(sometimes), and the changes to migrant language standards are another good topic to discuss this on. /color]
-"different subsystems of language"(prompt) Perhaps expand by discussing phonology for example?

I'd say a (high) 12/15, as some key ideas were expressed really well, but quotes chosen could have been more "worth using/remembering". For example," ethnolects “express links with their heritage communities” " contributes to the essay as much as it would without the name/quotation marks. Imo, quotes that express an idea in a heightened/sophisticated way are greater 'bang for your buck'.
Analysis as well could be delved into more, as that's one of the key requirements of a really good essay; however, overall, there's definitely effort that has been put into the essay which shows through !
Aims:
2016- Methods [50], Physics [42]
Actual: Methods [49], Physics [45]
2017- EngLang[41] Bio[45] Chem[45] Spesh[50] MUEP Maths[4.0]
Actual: Englang[44] Bio [46] Chem [41] Spesh[48] MUEP Maths [5.0]

ATAR: 99.80 ❤️❤️❤️

2018-2022: Bachelor of Health Sciences in Dentistry/Master of Dentistry
No, I can't fix your teeth (yet)

eru

  • Victorian
  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • Respect: +3
Re: English Language essay submission and marking
« Reply #269 on: October 28, 2017, 12:49:24 am »
+6
Prompt: ‘Jargon has two distinct functions: the primary function is to serve as a technical or specialist language. The other is to promote in-group solidarity: to exclude those people who do not use the jargon.’How does jargon (professional or popular) create cohesiveness within a speech community? Support your response with specific examples.

Our linguistic repertoire, being a product of our central dogmata, inherently acts as a marker in defining who we are and the speech communities to which we do and do not belong. In this way, jargonistic items that constitute the lexicon of these social groups synthesises linguistic shibboleths, so only those who are able to conform to these highly individualistic language palettes form the in-group. As such, group boundaries are defined, allowing for the construction of cohesiveness within the speech community through the establishment of in-group solidarity. (Due to exam conditions, perhaps consider combining these two points into a single line and cutting some parts out because your intro is too long) While “jargon facilitates communication on one hand … [it] erects quite successful communication barriers on the other hand” (linguist Kate Burridge), excluding those in the out-group, thereby creating cohesion by emphasising who belongs. Moreover, jargon creates a succinct and precise way of communicating amongst group members by acting as a specialist language, erecting an efficient mechanism of communication to allow cohesion to be enhanced. In this sense, jargon accentuates harmony amongst group members, whilst distancing those who form the out-group.

Great introduction! Your contention is clear and I have a good sense of what you will be discussing.

Through the employment of jargon specific to a speech community, a language user can signal the cultures and sub-cultures they wish to participate in. In this way, members of the speech community can synthesise in-group solidarity, as linguist Clare Kramsch explains, “members of a social group draw personal strength and pride from using the same language”. Jargon pertaining to the realm of Stan-twitter, a facet of regular Twitter which comprises of fandoms that praise popular figures, as (is?) represented by the pre-modifier ‘stan’ which is a portmanteau (nice metalang) of the nouns ‘stalker’ and ‘fan’, enables members of the LGBTIQ+ community to take pride in their sexual orientation and gender identity. (This sentence is too long, so break it into two shorter sentences.) With respect to the marriage equality debate, one may post the jargonistic phrase “my poor wig” on their account to display appreciation towards a public figure’s support for the change, whilst the sentence fragment “drag her” could be used to signal one’s dismissal for those who support traditional marriage. Such usage was observed subsequent to Matthew Canavan’s comment “grow a spine” towards the homosexual community in their plea to push for a parliamentary vote, as LGBTIQ+ members of these fandoms took to stan-twitter to lambaste the National MP. (You’ve given 2-3 contexts for the examples so I think you can cut out the Matthew Canavan part and still have a storng BP for the exam) In this fashion, the use of jargon allows both closeted and open youths to enhance their positive face needs (do you mean enhancing the positive face needs of other youths in the group or their own positive face?) by appealing to their sexual identity (their own or someone else’s sexual identity? Sorry this part is vague), thereby promoting inclusivity and in-group solidarity as linguist David Crystal explains “[jargon is a] chief linguistic element that shows togetherness”. Jargon acts as a linguistic agent in flagging who belongs, allowing an interlocutor to foster social rapport, ultimately establishing cohesiveness within a speech community.

Although your examples are contemporary and have been analysed very well, my initial thought was ‘hey shouldn’t ‘stan’, ‘my poor wig’, and ‘drag her’ be labelled as slang, rather than jargon?’ Check: http://pediaa.com/difference-between-jargon-and-slang/ I’m not sure about this though so correct me if I’m wrong!

Only corrected the start because it’s late, however I have read the rest of your essay and there aren’t any major problems so everything looks good to me! I’d give this a 13-15, as you don’t stray from the prompt and you’ve used contemporary examples and metalang. Keep up the good work!