plagerism has begun to affect professors at high levels diverting them from the work of developing students writing and critical thinking abilities. students dont seem to realize how professors can tell whether the paper is plagerized or not.well, professors know what a student is capable of, how they write, the language they use and etc. professors can get previous essays from the student and combine them and realize that the quality and style are markedly different from what they have seen from the student before. therefore, even writing one or two sentences off the internet can be easily found from the website you've got it from which means that students dont have a way out of it. plagerism is more common then
By the end of the book, the reader completely sympathizes with the mental anguish Joe is going through. It puts the reader directly into Joe's shoes, no matter how badly the reader might not actually want to be there. Another tactic used to the book easier to connect with is the word choice. It is not a particularly wordy book. Trumbo uses simple language, never once in Johnny Got His Gun is there a need to search for the nearest dictionary.
When you do this, it turns a boring topic into an interesting and fun essay for the audience. The author also talks about colorless words that they are words we use in everyday conversations, colorless words use are nothing and how student also use every day slang adjectives. He also added in their colorful words which means finding the right word in the right place, writers often struggle with this. I agree with the author on how we write essays, I must say everything he wrote in this story is true for me. I often have a hard time trying to figure out what words fit where to make complete sense of the sentences or paragraphs.
Dear Editor, Garrett Hardin’s essay, “Lifeboat Ethics,” although a compelling read, is an appalling example of sloppy conservatism which seeks to manipulate the reader through erroneous, contradictory, bigoted, self-important, and cruel statements. “Lifeboat Ethics” is undoubtedly one of those opinion pieces that is meant to show readers the error of their ways. He all but begs the reader to set aside his or her “kind-hearted liberal” feelings, and provides many examples to walk the reader through his own viewpoint—as any good op ed should. (p. 134). Nonetheless, the omissions and baseless presumptions present in this piece insult the intelligence enough that it is impossible to seriously consider Hardin’s point (which is stunning in its brutality).
Nippers had a problem of indigestion due to which he used to be very inefficient till the noon and he used to commit many mistakes in copying the legal documents. Also, the lawyer complained that Nippers had a continual discontent with the chair and table used for copying, which, to him felt like Nippers wanted to get rid of table altogether (p. 104). Nippers, after noon though, was very efficient at copying the legal documents. This shows that the lawyer was always discontent somehow of his workers whatever they used to do.
Surowiecki employs the use of simple examples, experiments, and explanations to make his arguments make sense, and he does this so well that a reader on almost any level can easily understand them. In a book like this, where an author has decided to make a case for a concept that is radically different from the norm, establishing credibility is everything. If the author isn’t successful at
Nowadays text messages are making us lose our language because of the shorthand contractions. When it is time to communicate with someone by text messages, people use lots of emoticons to express feelings rather than using complete thoughts. They do not think about grammar or the rules that they have to follow when they are writing as in high school. Also, McGrath does not have any stereotype in this article. He talks in a general context because he does not pick any particular group of people.
Besides that, we cannot even understand his language without googling almost every other phrase or sentence. To fully understand his works, we often require deep analysis. No one walks around talking in old English any more. We need to learn current English because that’s how we speak and write it and some people already have enough trouble with writing current English. To learn Old English just to understand Shakespeare’s works, to me, is like learning calculus and physics to work at MacDonald’s your whole life.
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.
Paragraph Response Language Tricks * Dying metaphors * Pretentious Diction * Verbal False Limbs * Meaningless Words * Ready Made Phrases Political Language * Politics use language to conceal the meaning Decadent Culture MLA – (Orwell, 1) Paragraph Response to “Politics and the English Language” By: Julia Wilson George Orwell’s essay titled “Politics and the English Language” criticises the ugly and inaccurate written English of his time and examines the connection between political orthodoxies and the dishonour of language. Our language has been negatively impacted by “language tricks” mentioned in Orwell’s essay such as dying metaphors, meaningless words, and pretentious diction. Dying metaphors are overused turns or phrases that have lost meaning due to their overuse. These phrases tend to lack imagery because they no longer fit or have meaning in today’s society. In the essay, Orwell states that, “there is a huge dump of worn-out metaphors which have lost all evocative power and are merely used because they save people the trouble of inventing phrases for themselves” (Orwell, 2).