11IB Summer Assignment: 1984 Dialectical Journal First, acquire and read 1984 by George Orwell! Then you will complete a two-part dialectical journal, below. Objectives of the two-part dialectical journal: • Understand and recognize allusion as a literary and rhetorical device • Apply research discovery to text • Analyze allusions for greater depth of understanding in regard to the context, purpose, and intended audience of a text • Connect cultural context of a text with the author’s language • Articulate how nuances in language (in regard to diction, syntax, figurative language, etc.) help to reveal the author’s intentions • Articulate the impact of the manipulation of language Due Date/Submission Instructions: This assignment will be …show more content…
Most allusions serve to illustrate or enhance the subject, but some are used in order to undercut it ironically through the discrepancy between the subject and the allusion (A Glossary of Literary Terms, Abrams). An example is completed for you, so that you understand the expectation. Topic choices Findings (100-200 words) Connection to allusion in text, with analysis of authorial purpose and intended audience Cited textual support with analysis of how language reveals culture/context Joseph Stalin Stalin was the leader of the Soviet Union from years, 1929-1953. Stalin essentially made the Soviet Union, more industrialized. Also the countries attention turned more to Militarism. Stalin was famous for his collectivized farming and work camps. He would send people that thought differently than him, his enemies, and people who didn’t follow the norm to death or work camps. Stalin was working with the united states and great Briton during world war 2 but after the war he focused his attention on spreading communism to eastern Europe and making his country bigger. In total through his years, Stalin was responsible for more than 20 million people’s …show more content…
Of course the great wastage is in the verbs and adjectives, but there are hundreds of nouns that can be got rid of as well. It isn't only the synonyms; there are also the antonyms. After all, what justification is there for a word, which is simply the opposite of some other word? A word contains its opposite in itself. Take ‘good,’ for instance. If you have a word like ‘good,’ what need is there for a word like ‘bad’? ‘Ungood’ will do just as well – better, because it's an exact opposite, which the other is not. Or again, if you want a stronger version of ‘good,’ what sense is there in having a whole string of vague useless words like ‘excellent’ and ‘splendid’ and all the rest of them? ‘Plusgood’ covers the meaning or ‘doubleplusgood’ if you want something stronger still. Of course we use those forms already, but in the final version of Newspeak there'll be nothing else. In the end the whole notion of goodness and badness will be covered by only six words – in reality, only one word. Don't you see the beauty of that, Winston? It was B.B.'s idea originally, of course," he added as an