INTRODUCTION
The English language has gone through tremendous development to reach where it is today. The development changes exists in seven critical stages. However, it is the transition phase between the seventeenth century and eighteenth century that has generated many public debates, because, as some scholars of English language put, it represents the transition of the tongue from the guidance of grammarians to the leadership of lexicographers. One such scholar is Mitchel who claims that while grammarians were the guardians of the English language in the seventeenth century, in the eighteenth century, it shifted to lexicographers. In this essay, therefore, I intend to critically evaluate Mitchell’s claim by comparing it with Samuel Johnson’s
…show more content…
Lexicons are still elementary and consist of synonym, also included are the meanings of words that are not long, and commentary for a given the name. However, dictionaries start to emerge as a result of a conflict that arises among grammarians who fail to agree on translations. Lexicographers start to set standards on how the language should appear. At first, some of the times, dictionaries disappoint many as they comprise documents that are not complete of the tongue, thus giving a definition of the meaning of a word that is not clear (Mitchell, 1994). It is during this time that Samuel Johnson introduces his dictionary that has the responsibility to legislate rules that guide the language. For him to achieve his goal, the dictionary codifies and further standardize in a well-arranged manner, the English language (Lane, …show more content…
As evident above, it is not until 18th century that lexicographers emerge as the legislature of the English language. Also, it is only Samuel Johnson who becomes recognized for his work in writing a dictionary even though lexicographers existed before him. The illustration here is that, depicts that grammarians never wished to be toppled as the ones in charge of making language decisions. The prestige of which this comes with unable grammarians from seeing the mutual benefit it has to both the people and their understanding of the tongue. As evidence of mutual benefit, after lexicographers emerge as certain individuals in charge of setting standards of the language, they start including grammar in dictionaries to ensure accuracy in the
At the same time, he clearly shows how much weight the domestic politics, and in particular the election, had on the decisions of the Monroe Administration. May gives a detailed picture of the domestic and international events and actors, which effectively sets the stage for his argument. Other than a few uses of words such as “cisatlantic”, May’s writing is very simple to read and understand (218). Because the subject matter is a global affairs issue, it would behoove the reader to have a basic understanding of the global events of the time. May does an excellent job of returning to primary sources for understanding the context of the events.
He acknowledges that the Americans have not denied that they fall under the liability of taxes to the mother country. However, he goes admonishes the very questioning and petitions for relief of taxation. Johnson declares that any such actions deny all powers of “sovereignty” (Johnson par
Wilson’s use of satire and other rhetorical devices effectively exposes the immature nature of the arguments between these two groups as well as demonstrate how counterproductive they can be. Wilson’s format is the first striking thing the reader notices. Both passages have the same general structure: They both begin by discrediting the other group, they both claim their group is entirely irreproachable, and they conclude by briefly establishing their own goals and ideas. This not only proves how similar the strategies are, but also establishes the immature and ineffective nature of these arguments.
This argument is in stark opposition with the argument of Extract 1 which argues that the decision was both constitutional and favours the Union. Whilst both extracts agree that ‘Southern rights’ were fully represented in the verdict and that the South gained a ‘great success’ through the decision, Extract 1 notes that this is a victory for the Union, whilst Extract 2 suggests that it was only a success in the eyes of ‘shallow’ Southerners. Extract 2’s interpretation is more accurate than that of Extract 1 because it
Thesis: Andrew Jackson’s followers believed to enforce than follow the constitution. Document A was written by George Henry Evans on “The Working Man’s Declaration Of Independence’. I agree and disagree with what he says on a few things. I agree on him saying that the lower and middle class tends to get oppression than the upper class. I disagree of his way of stopping oppression in society is to stand up against the government.
Johnson will serve as a Connecticut agent, to help put the colony’s title on a Native American land. While Johnson is at Britain, he will soon realize that Britain’s policy is mostly made up of American’s conditions. When the Patriots become wild up with their demands, Johnson knew that he couldn’t be part of the Patriots actions. Johnson agrees that the Patriots were correct about their actions but he have trouble from breaking up with his mother country. Johnson avoids associating with the Patriots by rejecting his election to the First Continental Congress and this move of Johnson will make the Patriots remove him from the militia command.
He starts out his paragraphs with a general definition of the word and then by the end of the paragraph, provides a specific example to back his case. This strategy provides him with a solid foundation for his point
• “An Unsettling Settlement” is an article that appeared in Harper’s Weekly in the spring of 1869 that discusses and questions the Tenure of Office Act (the act is also included as one of my sources). This is the first of many primary sources that I have included in this annotated bibliography. I wanted to include this article when I argue if the Tenure of Office Act is constitutional or not and to discuss Andrew Johnson’s legacy on the presidency. “Articles of Impeachment of Andrew Johnson.”
Truly, Wilson’s first major mistake was not inviting one of the major Republican congressmen such as Lodge to attend the peace proceedings in Paris. But in truth, the excerpt reveals Wilson’s true motive for the issue. The idealist radiates from Wilson’s words in the allusions to “the boys who went across the water to fight,” and it is evident that he truly believed that a cause as prodigious as preserving world peace would somehow render a nonpartisan act of approval from Congress. [which was a colossal miscalculation of Wilson, given the men who were in the Senate!] Naturally then, Wilson would wanted Article X included at all costs {Document C].
To exemplify this essential skill, Allen utilizes the phrase, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,” and determines through the critical analysis of key sentences like this, that the readers will not only “understand the Declaration better but also… understand every politician better” (150). Allen asserts that this “sound bite” alludes to the Declaration's consideration of the entirety of the United States in the authors’ appeal for freedom and equality. Furthermore, Allen insinuates that this should be an obvious synopsis since “the signers of the Declaration had confidence in their readers” (150). While Allen reads between the lines of the Declaration with the optimism that maybe the authors had the best intentions for the futures of the Black community and women as well as White men, others may choose to read between the lines that thirty-four out of forty-seven of the signers of the Declaration owned slaves. Furthermore, in a modern context, this confidence that Allen believes the authors of the Declaration have for their readers is poorly placed.
In the 1971 correspondence between a free African-American man and the author of The Declaration of Independence, differences are seen in how each man views freedom, equality, and race. Benjamin Banneker wrote to Thomas Jefferson to discuss the issues within the freedom and equality of enslaved black men. Thomas Jefferson’s response touched on the issues presented to him, but none were resolved. After this correspondence, Jefferson writes to Joel Barlow and states his true opinions on Banneker. By using these documents, I will summarize, compare, and analyze the opinions on freedom, equality, and race between Benjamin Banneker and Thomas Jefferson.
Wilson believed Article X was the “inevitable logical center of the whole system of . . . the League of Nations (Document B).” Wilson was taught from a young age not to “compromise with wrong (Bailey).” He saw the senators not only as being wrong, but as being “lesser intellects” and “pygmy-minded (Bailey).” This sense of superiority caused Wilson to underestimate the strength of the opposition and the legitimacy of their argument against Article X. He steadfastly refused to compromise on any aspect of the League of Nations, despite the Senate having concerns about Article X being unconstitutional (Document D).
In “Does Coming to College Mean Becoming Someone New?”, Kevin Davis argues that when going to college students face the choice of becoming someone new to fit into the discourse community of their chosen degree or select a new one more aligned with their style and values. Using his personal experience, Davis demonstrates his unsuccessful attempt to join the English discourse community. Consequently, Davis “felt like an outsider” (80) when starting his studies as an English major, a degree, he felt, would fit well with his “love of reading and writing” (80). The all-in commitment to becoming someone new to join, Davis clarifies is reason he never became a member of the English major community, and decided he would go into business instead. After a while, in the business sphere, he returned to the academic world and found a discourse community that he felt accepted him as he was the discourse community known as rhetoricians.
Creations, like most things in life, are improvable. Ideas and theories are always evolving into different ideas or more sophisticated ones. Discourse communities is a term that has been debated over the years. Three of those debaters are James Paul Gee, James P. Porter, and John Swales. In this essay I will analyze what each of these writers see as the definition of a discourse community while comparing specific points that each of them have regarding their personal view on the subject.
Over the course of English 1302 at Texas Tech, I feel that my skills as a writer improved significantly. When beginning the class, I knew little about writing a literature review or researched argument. With the help of my instructor’s lectures and the University Writing Center, I was able to effectively get my point across effectively while forming a well developed and well spoken manner. The advice given to me about argumentative essays and integrating sources helped significantly over the course of this class, and the skills learned in English 1302 helped me in other classes this semester when writing as well. One of the things I have learned that influenced me the most was my professor’s advice about an argument.