In Jon Hooten's editorial "fighting Words: The War Over Language," he argues that we relate almost everything to war subconsciously. We are unwillingly more attracted to things associated with war because they bring excitement to the topic. It if for this reason why I agree with Hooten's argument. In the article, he writes:"Our popular culture thinks nothing of invoking the language of conflict to describe most any topic. "This is relatable to almost anything on social media.
Jake Jamieson wrote “The English-Only Movement” while he was a student at the University of Vermont. In this essay he discusses the issue of legislating English as the official language in the United States. He strongly beliefs that the government should not fix an issue that is not broken. Throughout his writing he uses outside resources that support the idea of English-only; even though he was trying to explain the differences about both side it seems like he is being bias at first. Jamieson could have made his paper stronger if he would have stated what he believed instead of saying others believe; although his arguments are based on people’s rights and emotions towards being obligated to speak English in America his argument contains evidence and communication abilities to get his point across.
He indicates that the road users insult him, throw gravel, and show disrespect to him because they use the privileged perspective. Dowsett argued that “And so people in cars—nice, non-aggressive people— put me in danger all the time because they see the road from the privileged perspective.” (Dowsett, p.
In his essay “The World of Doublespeak,” William Lutz define doublespeak as “a blanket term for language which makes the bad seem good, the negative appear positive, the unpleasant attractive, or at least tolerable” (2013). Lutz goes on to claim “It is language which avoids, shifts, or denies responsibility” (2013). He explains the purpose of doublespeak is to “mislead, distort, deceive, inflate” (2103). Based on many of his examples, such as wording an airplane as an airplane that has had “uncontrolled contact with the ground,” or referring to a city slum as the resident of the “fiscal underachievers,” I feel he may overstate his own definition of doublespeak. While, the play on words in these examples does attempt to deceive the read and
William Apess (1) Preaching on behalf of the Indians, who he believed had unjust laws made for them and only longed for justice and Christian fellowship, William Apess would have been _____ with the phrases “Establish justice” and “Secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity” which serve to ensure that all American citizens would experience fairness, moral rightness, lawfulness under the Constitution as well as ensure sure freedom and fairness continues for ourselves and every generation to come. (2) Apess’ spoke about a searing indictment of racial prejudice against people of color, particularly Native Americans, so he would respond positively to the phrase “We the People” which would unite all the citizens of the United States of America, and guarantee them the rights given under the document, regardless of ethnicity, nationality or skin color and therefore address the very strong disapproval of the way the Euro-American treated the Native people. Henry David Thoreau (1) Believing that if the government required people to participate in injustice by obeying
Analytical Response #1 New English Canaan by Thomas Morton in the text of segments of his first book ,chapter four which consisted of his detailed account of native dwelling from what they were constructed from and what they consisted of too the sense of community, hospitality, and humanity. In chapter fifteen, Morton he ultimately described how “savages of New England,” were excellent hunters and had a natural knack for it, he really in not so many words described them as hinting dogs and not as superior to non-native persons. Morton’s tone throughout both chapters exalted and praised natives for their maintaining of peace and their independence. Morton utilizes his fondness of the natives to shed light on ideally what the new settlements
uperman and Me Adelaida Urrea Sherman Alexie, in his essay, “Superman and Me”, recounts how he learned to read even though he lived in poor family inside a community where education was disparaged. Alexi’s purpose is to describe how kids are expected to fail academically since education is not cared for in Native American communities, and ignite change in the ways Native American children are educated. He adopts an inspirational tone in order to encourage other Native Americans to follow his example and educators to help solve this problem. Alexi projects an inspirational tone, through the use of diction to achieve his purpose.
In “Slurring Perspectives,” Elisabeth Camp begins with the argument that slurs are “powerful” and “insidious” precisely because they “present contents from a certain perspective, which is difficult to dislodge despite the fact that it is precisely what a nonbigoted hearer most wants to resist.” It is this reason why slurs are considered more offensive than “pure expressives” like “damn,” because they denote certain negative properties which are meant to contain harmful, “truth-conditionally robust properties” (Camp 330). Camp then goes on to say that slurs “conventionally signal a speaker’s allegiance to a derogating perspective on the group identified by the slur’s extension-determining core” (Camp 331). It is this derogating perspective
Society is constantly progressing to improvement, and language can reflect that drastically (Bulletin). To conclude, slang from the 1920s has impacted language used in the current era. While times and motivations have changed, the vibrant meaning of slang words and the reasons behind their use stays the same. Social liberation, freedom, relaxation, music, and political activism will always spawn interesting words in every generation, and common place terms will gain new meaning in the world of tomorrow.
In the novel Jasper Jones the protagonist Charlie is faced with racial aggravation towards his friend Jeffery and his family. As the story progresses, even though they seem small at the time, these racial stereotypes have cruel and unfounded aggravation. Silvey uses a range of language techniques to emphasise how unjustified the racial aggravation is. Jeffery is considered a racial outsider by the villagers and this is evident by the way they treat him.
Although this sort of language is not limited to the characteristics of AAE, it situates the African American childhood in their socially disadvantaged environment, where the inhibition level of using taboo vocabulary is at a minimum and the language is, in fact, that which is considered inappropriate in other social
It Bites Back In The End In the novel, The Hate U Give, a memorable quote states,“Listen!, The Hate U--the letter U--Give Little Infants F*** Everybody. T-H-U-G L-I-F -E. Meaning what society gives us as youth, it bites them in the a** when we wild out,”(Thomas, 32).
The essay “The F Word” was written by Firoozeh Dumas who was a young Iranian girl when she and her family moved to America. She has written this essay due to justify the way American people see foreigners. She expresses in depth the troubles she went through when she was a child growing up with an Iranian name. She explains the thoughts that the other kids had and she gives examples of how these kids made fun of her other Iranian friends and siblings. Her reason for writing this essay was to bring attention to what growing up as foreigner with a different type of name is like in America.
In the ontological investigation of language, namely the classification of what makes language what it is. Many philosophers are fascinated by the nature of language. Some philosopher holds a view of essentialism that presupposes there is an identical and continuous universals essence, which can justify all human language. However, the objection to Essentialists’ approach to the study of language is that with such assumption of intrinsic properties of language exists, they have presupposed “language” as a constant real substance. Both Western philosopher Ferdinand de Saussure and Ludwig Wittgenstein have rejected the simplistic notion of the essence in explaining the nature of language, and suggest the similarities between languages are merely one side of the linguistic phenomenon.
Language comes naturally, and as time as passed, we have been more inclined to say whatever we want. Unfortunately, recently we have seen more offense being taken to words we say. This is because language can affect people in different ways. In other words, some
