While Orwell was explaining that writers will gain an emotional attitude and might not be able to escape his emotions when writing, he said something very interesting. “It is his job, no doubt, to discipline his temperament and avoid getting stuck at some immature stage, in some perverse mood: but if he escapes from his early influences altogether; he will have killed his impulse to write.” This sentence shows metaphor and cumulative sentences altogether. It shows metaphor because he is talking about getting stuck at a specific stage but he is no literally talking about getting stuck somewhere, physically. Cumulative sentence is also shown here because he is combining both sentences together to prove a point by using a
In this essay, I will present to you how this saying is completely wrong. The power of language can affect the way people interpret a piece of text just because of a few words. Just one word like ‘before’ and ‘after’ has a big impact on how many people understand it. A great example that Bauer uses in the book is the challenge that Miss Tarango sets before the boys. The challenge was that any boy who volunteered would sit on a chair.
Chhabra also utilizes parenthesis throughout her review to insert more information into her sentences. The first occurrence of parallelism appears in the second sentence of Appendix B. Chhabra inserts information about the publication year and about the main character Liesel Meminger. While this information is in fact grammatically correct, it overload of information in single sentences is confusing. The pace is sped up but a clear direction is lost by these parenthetical interjections. In the first paragraph of the “Death, the Compassionate Narrator” section, the parenthesis by means of apposition is used quite well for the descriptions Liesel’s Papa and Mama.
Like many other writers, I often find myself guilty of including the occasional redundancies in my writing; however, Bauby’s writing has taught me that power exists in brevity. Often the most crucial ideas are the simplest, and as writers, we must learn to slow the stream of our thoughts to achieve such impactful
I am writing this letter for you to comprehend why I have informed you that your written essay of Geoffrey Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales is a form of plagiarism as well as to educate you on how you may be able to avoid another form of academic dishonesty for your future written works. According to an online website of Indiana University Bloomington, plagiarism is “using others’ ideas and words without clearly acknowledging the source of that information.” Also, as you may probably think, paraphrasing is not plagiarism which is true but only if it is done properly. Your work will only be recognize as an acceptable paraphrase work rather than plagiarized work if all words or phrases are completely written in your own words and sentence structure. In addition to that, replacing or rearranging a few words do not count as a paraphrase, therefore, such works should be cited. As to your response, you have mentioned your information was a common knowledge, however, the passage on your written essay contains a very similar sentence structure to the definition of Middle English from C. Hugh Holman’s A Handbook to Literature.
This is due to Rose using plenty of descriptors in his writing, and sometimes may seem repetitive. For example, the first sentence of the passage says “To vitalize that imagination, we need to rethink our notions about mind and work, but also reassess long-standing notions and seemingly self-evident distinctions among levels and kinds of knowledge.” In this sentence, you might have realized the words reimage and reassess. These two words are synonyms, meaning they have the same meaning, yet he used both words in the same sentence. Another repetition occurs when Rose says “notions about mind and work” and “long-standing notions and seemingly self-evident distinctions among levels of knowledge.” The only difference between the two is that the latter is more descriptive than the first. The reason Rose may do this is to first put the idea in your head that certain notions need attention, and then goes into detail.
I have learned the importance of writing several drafts. Creating a rough draft and then simply changing a few things would then produce a poorly written paper. In fact, starting with prewriting is a must, along with writing several drafts. After finishing my first draft of the profile paper, I thought that my paper was decent. I then received a critique and recognized that there was still a lot more
Are the flaws that Professor Levinson talks about so serious that the articles of the Constitution should be revised? I want to start this discussion from Jaron Lanier’s quote; “Criticism is always easier than constructive solutions” (n.d.). Professor Levinson criticizes the Constitution for its imperfections.
Although it was shocking I was accepting of the change and didn’t judge. I think a lot about how much he will suffer with the process. He will lose friends and family, get looks and most of all have nasty things said about him. Coincidentally it was around this time that I was told to write an argumentative paper on the topic of my choosing. The idea then came to me and the timing couldn’t be better.
Mckenna, I too wrote about the mindless monster and the negative effects it can have on someone. It's crazy to think about the lengths people will go to please someone and will overwork themselves to make sure others are happy. I believe that the only way to be truly happy is to make sure you're good first. The other aspect I agree with was your point on body language. That is something I need to work on a lot as well.
“Shitty First Drafts” definitely caught my attention because of its use of profanity in the title. It was eye catching and chose to read it first over Stephen Kings, “What Writing is”. Lamott’s and King’s ideas on writing are different from one another. King compares writing to telepathy and how pictures in people’s minds are portrayed through writing. While Lamott’s ideas are that writing is a process and it takes many attempts.
The author uses several exclamation marks such as after “Heart!”, “tonight!”, Haste!”, and “remember him!”. This ads emphasis and is used so that the reader focuses greatly in those lines as they are the most important concepts to the author. The author, also uses personification and apostrophes like in the word “Heart”. A heart does not think or feel or forget. However, the author makes the speaker talk to it and make resolutions with it, that the heart and the speaker will both forget the person that broke their heart
In the article “Shitty First Drafts” by Anne Lemott she discusses how every writer has difficulty putting their ideas on paper because writing should be seen as a process that even the best and famous writers follow. She also talks about how even the best writers don’t just come with ideas and just begin writing on paper and make it as their final draft. Lemott also points out the importance of being able to just write down every thought into the first draft regardless of the structure of the draft and how it makes it easier to start the second draft. After writing the second draft it makes the final draft a review of punctuation and grammar corrections. As a food reviewer she struggled putting her ideas together because she would start doubting
We, the reader are able to understand the entire novel. After reading the novel, we can distinguish the character’s standard or so. For instance, there is a lot of grammatical error in Myrtle’s play because she is not an Ivy League graduate, but she pretends to be like people from East Egg. His writing styles are appealing (appeals the emotions), emotional more than logical (they make decision with full of emotions which might not be a good idea esp. when Wilson killed Gatsby), intellectual (Ivy League graduates and their way to handle the situation esp.