It consists in gumming together long strips of words which have already been set in order by someone else, and making the results presentable by sheer humbug (Orwell 209).” Orwell uses powerful but invective language to argue that current writing habits are ineffective in affecting the audience in any meaningful way. He shows the weakness of the English language while displaying a powerful alternative to current writing styles. Another reason for his use of invective language is due to the dishonest nature of political writing. Orwell stated that political writing was formed “to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind (Orwell 214).” This
Chris ENG 101 13 September 2009 Assignment 2: Final Draft Orwell and Lederer Arguments George Orwell in “Politics and the English Language” and Richard Lederer in “The Case for Short Words” share a similar concern with bad habits forming in the English Language and its impact on a writer’s perspective in writing a good paper. Orwell’s central point in his essay is that the English Language is becoming untidy. Supporting his case, Orwell argues that bad habits are forming do to our foolish thoughts, caused by the slovenliness of our language. Of equal importance is Orwell’s insistence that all these bad habits are reversible. As Orwell states, “The habits can be avoided if one is willing to go through the trouble.
We may attribute the deterioration of English writing with political language. Riddled with so many ambiguous statements, it is commonplace for political language to be written in modernized English. Political statements that are made offer no description of what the statement is truly about, but instead a large labyrinth of words. It is easier to deceive us when statements regarding politics are so vague. Instead of defining an issue, or explaining their intent, the statements they make are often misleading or unidentifiable.
Andrew Ofstad's "America's Decline in Literacy Reading: Grappling with Technology's Effects on the Print of Culture" and Ursula Le Guin's "Staying Awake: Notes on the Alleged Decline of Reading" are both essays that focus on the decline of reading in society. Ofstad explains what he believes are pros and cons to technology and how it could be used with literature. While Le Guin can only see a negative affect technology has on society and literature, she believes literature should not coexist with technological devices. I understand that reading is necessary for learning, but I also believe that strategic games also help with developmental brain growth. Ofstad and Le Guin see with literature as a way to improve writing and
If abstractness, projection of people’s emotions, and uselessness of art create morality in art, then the art itself cannot be moral or immoral, thus proving Wilde’s theory true. There are different examples in the book The Picture of Dorian Gray that shows Dorian’s projection of his own feelings onto art rather than just letting the art be a form of pleasure. Dorian constantly projects meaning and pulls out morals from art, which leaves Dorian feeling poisoned. At one point he even tells Lord Henry that he was never going to forgive him for being poisoned with a book (Wilde 180). Lord Henry responds to this by noting that Dorian was beginning to moralize, and this was a negative thing because he believed that the books and art themselves did not make morals, therefore art could not be poison.
The first one is ignoring any offensive speech and the second one is making conscience about how forms of expression can be offensive to others through dialogue. Throughout the essay he arguments that although everyone has the freedom of speech, this is not always something positive; however, it is not easy to limit or prohibit someone else from freedom of speech. Many forms of speech might be insulting or offensive to others. Bok’s first argument, “The fact that speech is protected by the First Amendment does not necessarily mean that it is right, proper or civil”(66), is then supported by the example of poor use of freedom of speech that happened at Harvard University with the flags. He qualifies this act as “insensitive and unwise” because although the ones who displayed the flags are satisfied with what they did, many others will be offended (66).
Envious vs. Jealous At first glance the average person might think that the words envious and jealous can be used interchangeably, because they are synonyms, but if you stop and analyze these two words you will find that they are not all that interchangeable. When it comes to deciding what words are kept in a language and what words are eventually replaced by more efficient words, a linguist knows that a language can only stand to keep words that communicate something and that are efficient in that communication process. Due to the fact that a language only keeps words that are need to communicate something that is unique to that word I believe that the English language would not keep envious and jealous if the two words communicated the same exact message. In the first half of this paper I will analize the word envious and how it is used in literary examples. Then in the second half of this paper I will look at the word jealous and how it is used in literary texts.
He also uses a variety of sources, ranging from political to economical, religious, and even psychological texts, making his essay trustworthy and credible. In regards to the topic itself, after reading Orwell’s essay, I believe language is failing due to our generation tendencies. Language is political from top to bottom. It is deviated from its original purpose, to simplify communication. It’s become a political matter.
Slurs, on the other hand, are simply wrong. Although all slurs are harmful, society does not seem to react unless enough people have made a big deal about it. The use of the “N” word from a white person would be a huge deal, while the use of the word “cracker” would likely be overlooked. Why is it that schools would punish people for the use of the “N” word and not “cracker”? It is because no one has made a big deal about it.
The existence of interpersonal communication is a given in persuasion research. Although one could conceivably be persuaded by the facts alone (without the intervention of a source), that would generally be characterized as learning rather than persuasion. The only controversial aspect of the above definition is the inclusion of the word intentional. It seems to this writer that receivers who overhear an argument and find it convincing have been persuaded, even though the source never intended to convince them, however, this quibble with the definition need not affect its adoption here. Which, verifies the studies of effectiveness and risk with attempting to use humor with persuasion,