Stephen Vasciannie’s article ‘Dutty Wine’ is a controversy which is still debatable. The title of the article gives way to what the writer will talk about. There is ambivalence in his arguments, as it isn’t clear whether he is opposing or in agreement with the statement. His thoughts and opinion on the matter is well organized and argued, however he lacked sufficient evidence to sway the readers to take his side. The use of the anecdote is a good approach in beginning his argument.
Sullivan did an in-depth analysis on many main ideas. He backed most of arguments with plenty of excerpts from “The Way to Wealth”, and included many reliable outside sources. The only negative, as mentioned above, was the fact he did not include the contradicting proverbs in his analysis. If Sullivan had included examples of one of his main points, his analysis would be very helpful. Although he failed to support that main point, the rest of his arguments would be hard to dispute considering the amount of support he was able to gather.
The references used are mostly from the expert opinions, personal observations and research are not detailed enough to gain reader conviction towards his belief in this issue. He should include along the strong facts that may help to influence the reader such as the statistic result from reliable source which is more convincing. However, the article possess credibility as the support given does relate with the
With the previous analysis of methodology in mind, analyzing the truisms brings some interesting observations. It is easy to take the truisms for granted, as truisms aim to state the truth with a certain blatancy, but truisms are not quite the same as the truth. The meaning behind Holzer’s truisms fall apart when analyzing their validity. Many of the truisms presented could be viewed as self-evident, while others might be argued, and a select few may even be self-contradictory. Take for example, “it’s not good to hold too many absolutes,” ironically, this truism itself an absolute.
I was able to voice my opinion and not have to always worry if my language was too casual. I tried to state the facts clearly, and give supporting information, to make a strong argument. However, I was able to put in a sarcastic comment here and there, which gave the op-ed more life. I think that I communicated my point, however it is hard to really have a strong opinion on the facts given on this topic. While I believe that parents should not worry so much about poisoned candy, there is no telling if it may happen in the future.
The reason for applying this strategy in the creation legal terminology might be that due to its qualities in some cases a metaphorical term may turn out to be more suitable as it may be able to replace a lengthy explanation or it may bring the most correct understanding of the idea, so there would be no use in trying to put it somehow differently. Prof. Matilla (2006: 75) states that in contrast to medieval legal language which used to be figurative, modern is neutral, with only few modest traces of the colourful legal language remaining. He argues that metaphors in particular are rarer in the modern legal language, however, there exist differences between the diverse legal cultures, as in legal English metaphors are more frequent than in legal French. However, according to Matilla, metaphors are still being used in some situations
In fact, almost everyone tend to turn a deaf ear to critics and make an attempt to create an invisible shield in order to stay away from them. Apart from some minor negative effects of criticism which can be surmounted, people undoubtedly receive significant benefits by listening criticism as well. This essay will discuss the advantages followed by disadvantages and how to deal effectively with criticism in turn. First of all, criticism is obviously viewed as an essential factor leading to success. Constructive criticism is aimed to not only point out the weaknesses but also show how to improve them.
Overall, she thought it was good. In detail, she said there were some mistakes which need improving. She said some of my sentences lacked variety in length and complexity and sometimes, the linking words were not very accurate. However, she did not show me detailed examples so I had some difficulties in figuring out what I should improve. Moreover, in her opinion, my word range was good and all I need to do was that for some words, I should have made it more academic.
Furthermore, the judgement given was well understood and AG Maduro chose to discard the usage of the term ‘selling arrangements’ which in Keck, caused a degree of confusion. This action is worth praising but it could also insist that the Court refused to tackle the issue head on. However, a notable merit of this judgement is how the Court paired it within well known concepts of market-access and direct or indirect discrimination while at the same time being consistent with Keck. These concepts are well-understood and it gives an opportunity for the Court to apply the law with a greater degree of clarity and ease. With that being said, Vassilopoulos is a case that is worth applauding for such reason, especially at a time where there was massive uncertainty surrounding the rule of law regarding MEQRs.
A thesaurus can help you find synonyms, or words with similar meanings. Using a range of words will made your talk more interesting. Irony Saying the direct opposite of one’s thoughts in order to create an effect is what we call irony. It is also an event or situation that seems very nice, but turns out to be the opposite of what you thought it would be. Some audience members may find irony difficult to pick-up irony which may cause misunderstandings.