Sunday, June 7, 2020

35mm Emphasis on Approach to Cinematographic Craft in Guadagninos Call Me by Your Name - Literature Essay Samples

Luca Guadagnino’s Call Me by Your Name is a poignant realization of a unique coming-of-age story that centers around the love which blossoms betweenElio, the 17-year-old son of an archeology professor, and Oliver, the 23-year-old graduate student that he invites over for the summer to assist him with his academic undertakings. Guadagino collaborated with Sayombhu Mukdeeprom as his director of photography to helm the camerawork in this visual realization of Andre Acmain’s novel of the same name. Mukdeeprom and Guadagnino shot the film using a single prime lens with a focal length of 35mm. Despite an acute understanding that a fair, visual realization of this text would demand a need to perform and capture continents of nuanced emotions, the pair saw it fit to proceed with a lens that granted only a single field of view; if a need for a wider field of view, or a narrower one, in the composition of a scene was felt, then the entire camera rig would physically have to be mo ved nearer or further away from the desired frame and composition. It is not uncommon for filmmakers to be equipped with dozens of lenses of varying focal lengths, however, being limited to one compelled the two to envision how the complexities of their characters, their desires, and their fears, could be compositionally framed and blocked in a way that would discourage the convenience of simply switching lenses to reach these objects. The field of view that is captured by a particular lens can vary from an extremely wide field of view, to one that is extremely narrow. The human vision’s field of view, for reference, is often slated to be around 50 mm. An attempt to understand Mukdeeprom and Guadagnino’s decision to shoot the entire feature on a single Cooke S4 35mm lens may yield varying interpretations. Regardless, it is important to note that being limited to a single focal length often leads to a dependence on an open frame composition. Scenes of open frame composition that oversee moments of personal discussion between Elio and Oliver are always warm and brightly lit, and constantly reiterate the feelings of unvoiced tension and a longing to comfortably speak, both hallmarks of their first meeting, as if to subtly remind us of this indelible weight. This ability to build, maintain, and reiterate a specific type of atmosphere simply through the repeated use of the similar compositions under identi cal lighting patterns, serves to demonstrate how the use of a single focal length may have encouraged a form of character expression and engagement through blocking, which may otherwise be taken for granted when afforded the luxury of multiple focal lengths. Even a casual viewing of this film would allow one to see that more often than not, many scenes in the film tend to begin with a character, often Elio or Oliver, one of whom is near the camera, in a tight-shot or close-up, only to end up in the foreground, as the scene unfolds. This ‘fluctuation’ arises from the simple art of blocking, a technique where actors are pre-directed about the positions they are expected to occupy during the course of a scene, which can change just once during the course of an entire scene, or more than once. Elio initially finds Oliver to be an intrusive presence, but little comes in the way of the two befriending one another. Oliver is outspoken, charming, and in many ways, a stark contradiction to Elio’s mellow, introversive self. The first act ends with a moment where the two are laying in a field of grass, looking at the sky above them, a development which reduces Elio’s vexed reception of Oliver up to this point, as red herr ings that served to undermine and even disguise his feeligns for him. Compositionally, this is the first scene in the film where they are both in a mid-close shot. Segues to scenes which follow from this point onwards, do not employ the ‘fluctuation’ that was observed up until that point; blocking wise, Oliver’s position will never shift from a close-up to a figure in the foreground, as if a test of Elio’s patience and commitment to veiling his feelings. This again serves to demonstrate how the art of blocking can yield results that may otherwise be simple, albeit uninspiring, in respect to an approach to the craft. Call Me by Your Name is by no means the first feature to be shot entirely using a single prime lens. However, it is one of the few slow-burners of art-house cinema in recent times to achieve what many would call a feat. On the other hand, it demonstrates the encouragement and drive that such a limitation often places on directors, and specifically, cinematographers, to tell stories in a manner that audiences are not accustomed to experiencing. Mukdeeprom and Guadagnino’s decision to focus on their approach to their craft, instead of merely the tools at the disposal, allowed them to reach for more with less, without giving away signs of compromise.

Sunday, May 17, 2020

Examples from the Screenplay of Trainspotting

Sample details Pages: 25 Words: 7402 Downloads: 6 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Statistics Essay Did you like this example? Introduction The main argument of this dissertation is that the language of John Hodges screenplay Trainspotting, even though it appears to contain sub-cultural social contexts, cannot be categorised within the framework of linguistic theory as representing a youth subculture. The verbal conflict formation in the text should be read as reflective of the larger worldview that verbal conflict behaviour is inevitable in all societies, as are the existence of social dialectsand the usage of common slang. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Examples from the Screenplay of Trainspotting | Linguistics" essay for you Create order 1. Gumperz Term: Speech Community In his 1982 volume Discourse strategies, John Gumperz discusses the concept of a speech community. He defines speech community as a system of organized diversity held together by common norms and aspirations. He also states that the speech community must form the starting point of linguistic analysis. He further states that although members of the same speech community may differ in terms of their beliefs and their behaviours, that this is a normal variation and has been shown to be a systematic regularity of communities. For, the most part, however, members of speech communities generally share norms of evaluation. Gumperz stresses the point that it is not the individual speakers of a language that make up a speech community. He cites the theories of Saussure and others of that time period to support this statement: It was believed that these reflect either momentary preferences, personal idiosyncrasies, or expressive or emotive tendencies, which rely on universal signalling mechani sms and are thus not part of the system of meaningful sounds by which substantive information is conveyed (11-12). According to Gumperz, although the ability to form grammatical statements is common to all speakers of a certain language, the more complex knowledge of contextualization convention varies widely. He also points out that contextualization is not something that can be attained through formal education or reading, but must be learned through face-to-face interactions. Discourse at this level is marked by conventions that reflect prolonged interactive experience by individuals cooperating in institutionalized settings in the pursuit of shared goals in friendship, occupational and similar networks of relationships (209). Language and social identity, a volume published in the same year, was co-authored by Jenny Cook-Gumperz. In this work, he discusses the role of communicative skills in our society, asserting that they have been radically altered. It is absolutely essential for individuals in todays society to be capable of managing or adapting to a variety of diverse communicative situations. In addition, they must be able to interact freely with people who are virtual strangers to them. These abilities are an absolute necessity if one is to acquire a sense of personal control and to establish a sense of order in ones life. The cause for this change, he asserts, is the bureaucratization of public institutions, which have become increasingly pervasive in our day-to-day lives. He sees this as a result of our post-industrial society and states that it exists in both Western and non-Western countries. The skills required to function at this level are far more complex, but must be mastered if one is to function autonomously as a member of a speech community. 2. Hallidays Notion: Antilanguages In Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation oflanguage and meaning, M.A.K. Halliday explains the initial acquisitionof language as part of the development of the child as a socialcreature: Language is the main channel through which the patterns ofliving are transmitted to him, through which he learns to act as amember of a society (9). The child does this, she goes on toexplain, through associations with family, neighbourhood, and varioussocial groups; these comprise the foundation on which the child baseshis or her belief systems and values. The child does not learn these things directly, but ratherindirectly, Halliday explains. It is through the accumulatedexperience of numerous small events, insignificant in themselves, inwhich his behaviour is guided and controlled, and in the course ofwhich he contracts and develops personal relationships of all kinds'(9). The unifying factor here is language; language is the mediumthrough which all of this takes place. She develops her discussion further by introducing the notion of anantisociety which is in direct contrast to society, describing theantisociety as a conscious alternative that can also be viewed as aform of resistance. This resistance can take a number of forms. It canbe passive, in which case it will appear, at least outwardly, to causeno harm. On the other hand, it can be actively hostile to the point ofcausing actual destruction. The antilanguage is the language of the antisociety. It isparallel to the antisociety, which of course generates it. Bothlanguage and its counterpart, antilanguage, share equal linguisticsignificance. According to Halliday, either pair, a society and itslanguage or an antisociety and its (anti) language, is, equally, aninstance of the prevailing sociolinguistic order (164). Halliday describes the antilanguage as a form of resocialization,as a mechanism that creates an alternative reality. In this sense, shedoes not see it as a negative construct, but rather of reconstruction(170). The significant aspect of the language/antilanguage dynamicexists in the distance between the two, and in the tension that iscaused by that distance. The individual may function in either worldand may go back and forth with relative comfort. In this sense, it mayseem that he is living a double existence. Still, it should not be forgotten that both aspectslanguage andantilanguageoriginate from the same place. Because of this commonbackground, there is continuity between them which parallels thatbetween society and antisociety. Not only is there a continuity, thereis also tension. Hence, although the languages may be expressed bymembers of different social strata, they are both parts of the samesocial system. In other words, the antisociety is, in terms ofLvi-Strausss distinction between metaphor and metonymy, metonymic tosocietyit is an extension of it, within the social system (Halliday175). Thus, basically, an antilanguage is just another language. However,the world it exists in is a counter-reality, which in itself hascertain implications: It implies preoccupation with the definition anddefence of identity through the ritual functioning of the socialhierarchy. It implies a special conception of information and ofknowledge (172). In addition, there will be a certain amount of secrecy in anantilanguage; this is inherent in its nature. The reality in which itfunctions is a secret reality. Generally, the members of this realitydo have secrets. Often these secrets may have something of an illegalassociation to them. It is just as likely, however, that the secretsare not illegal, but merely lacking in respectability and socialsanction. They may be the secrets of a segment of the population whichexists at least partly in its fringes, although its members may notwant this known in the mainstream. The antisociety is, then, a metaphorfor the society, and it joins society at the level of the social system. The perspective of the antilanguage is generally that of adistinctly different view of the world, one which is thereforepotentially threatening, if it does not coincide with ones own'(Halliday 179). The purpose of the antilanguage is primarily fordisplay as its speakers struggle to maintain their counter-realitywhile existing within the confines of the world. An antilanguage, according to Halliday, brings into sharp reliefthe role of language as a realization of the power structure ofsociety (181). The antilanguages of countercultures, such as prisonsand criminal networks, are often full are defined against the socialstructure. Essentially, they are defined by what they are not. This isnot unlike the jargon or nomenclature of certain highly-specialisedprofessions, which may in some sense be seen as having a similarthoughacceptable by societycounter-reality. Members of mainstream society who are speakers solely of standarddialect may have negative reactions to antilanguage. However, they willusually express this indirectly. For example, they may state that theydont like the vowels as they are pronounced by the speakers of theantilanguage, when in essence what they are saying is that they dontlike the values held by the speakers of the antilanguage. 3. Labovs Finding: The Concept of Sounding Labov and his colleagues (Paul Cohen, Clarence Robins, and JohnLewis) studied the vernacular of young American black males in theinner city areas of New York. The youths ranged in age from eight to 19years old, and they spoke a relatively uniform grammar, the language ofstreet culture. Labov and his team used a variety of methods to gather their data,the most important of which was long-term participant-observation withpeer groups (via). They collected tape-recorded conversations that tookplace on school buses, field trips, and partiesessentially, any typeof gathering where the youths got together and socialized. They thencarefully analyzed the data they collected, noting the patterns theyfound in speech events. Two examples of these exchanges are below. A: Eat shit. B: Hop on the spoon. A. Move over. B. I cant, your mothers already there. The following exchange is between two adolescents, John and Willie, with an observer (Rel) looking on: John: Who father wear raggedy drawers? Willie: Yeh the ones with so many holes in them when-a-you walk they whistle? Rel: Oh . . . shi-it! When you walk they whistle! Oh shit! (326) Given the insults against the person, his family, his poverty, aperson who is not a member of a given culture might expect thesituation to escalate into physical conflict. However, Labov points out that these are actually ritual insults. Herefers to this as sounding, which he describes as a complex patternof verbal conflict. Sounding has also been called playing the dozensor signifying. It consists of a dialogue that is usually performedfor an audience of observers who are usually peers. The dialogue itselfconsists of ritual insults, most of which are directed towards theother speakers mother, self, or housing situation. The speakers tradethese sounds back and forth as though in competition, and theaudience looks on. Occasionally an audience member will comment, approve, ordisapprove of the statements of one or both speakers. Labov points outthat the audience is an essential ingredient to this process: It istrue that one person can sound against another without a third personbeing present, but the presupposition that this is public behavior caneasily be heard in the verbal style. The presence of an audience has a definite impact on the speechevent. The sounds are no longer spoken in a direct, face-to-faceconversational mode when others are present. The speakers voices tendto be raised and they become more projected, suggesting full awarenessthat the audience is there. In the second exchange above, Rel makes acomment on Willies insult, praising it. In a sounding session, Labovpoints out, everything is publicnothing significant happens withoutdrawing comment. The rules and patterning of this particular speechevent are therefore open for our inspection (327). In fact, theexistence of an audience is considered a defining factor, according toLabov. A primary difference between sounding and other speech events isthat most sounds are evaluated overtly and immediately by theaudience (325). By closely analyzing the discourse of this segment of thepopulation, Labov was able to isolate certain characteristics and todiscern patterns in the structure of this ritual exchan ge of insults.After a while, the fundamental difference that divides ritual insultsand personal insults became clear. For example, there was a very clearopposition between an insult that is made during this ritualperformance and an actual, personal insult. The appropriate responsesare quite different: a personal insult is answered by a denial, excuse,or mitigation, whereas a sound or ritual insult is answered by longersequences (335). The ritual insults must be exaggerated to thepoint of being ridiculous and clearly untrue. This is clear to both thespeakers and to the audience that is following the exchange. If theinsults violate this rulefor example, one speaker makes a comment thatis both derogatory and which is known to be accuratethe ritual mayturn into conflict. The speech event we call sounding is not isolated from other formsof verbal interaction: it can merge with them or become transformedinto a series of personal insults, asserts Labov (330). He points outthat when ritual insult passes over into a different level ofdiscourse, that of interpersonal conflict, the difference between thetwo is unmistakably clear. Audience reaction is a key tool in assessing sounds. Laughter isthe primary mark of affirmation. A really successful sound will beevaluated by overt commentsAnother, even more forceful mode ofapproving sounds is t repeat the striking part of the sound oneself'(325). Negative reactions to sounds happen with a similar frequency andare equally overt. At the end of any sounding contest, all members,speakers and audience alike, are keenly aware of the who has come outahead. 4-a. Goffmans Notion: Face in Politeness Goffman writes that the ritual order seems to be organizedbasically on accommodative lines (109). These lines allow individualsto build and maintain illusions about themselves, and are not governedby laws or justice. Rather, Goffman asserts, the main principle of theritual order is not justice but face (110). Hence, the governingprinciple is what allows individuals to save face. Individuals whocross the line do not suffer retribution, but rather receive what isnecessary to bolster the illusion of self to which they are committed. The ways in which an individuals may insulate themselves aremyriad. Some of them include half-truths, illusions, andrationalizations. Therefore, not only are they able to convincethemselves of the beliefs necessary to his continued sense of self,they are further bolstered by the support of those close to them. Thusthey continue to believe in the illusion of self, and this illusion isfurther maintained and reinforced by the members of their immediate,intimate circle (109). 4-b. Does face exist in the discourse when verbal conflict occurs? An incidence of verbal conflict requires the individual uponwhom the offense has been committed to react in some way. The type ofreaction will depend on the level of offense. One mechanism for savingface is avoidance. That is, if a person is offended by anotherindividual, but can let the incident go without losing too much face,then it is likely that the offended person will let the situation go.He or she may rationalize this by telling themselves that they willdeal with the offender at some point in the future, perhaps when thecircumstances are optimalalthough it is just as likely that when thispoint in time presents itself, no action will be taken. If the offense committed against the person is great, an actionmust be taken by the offended person. They may decide to withdraw fromthe situation and may avoid future encounters with individuals whobreak the ritual code. Alternately, they may arrange to have theoffending person removed, thus ensuring that there will be no furthercommunication necessary with this individual. Societies must mobilize their members as self-regulatingparticipants in social encounters Goffman asserts. Ritual is one wayof doing this. Members of society are taught the importance of face,and that they should value such qualities as pride, honor, dignity, andpoise (110). Maintaining face then is a one way in which individuals protectthemselves and maintain their illusions of who they are and where theystand in the social hierarchy. This does not mean that face is realor authentic: Universal human nature is not a very human thing,asserts Goffman. By acquiring it, the person becomes a kind ofconstruct, built up not from inner psychic propensities but from moralrules that are impressed upon him from without (110). This constructis necessary for the individuals sense of self and helps him tomaintain the ritual equilibrium that is essential for his survival. 5. Brown and Levinson and the politeness phenomena Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson derive their definition offace from Goffman. They also include the English folk term, whichincludes the concept of being embarrassed or humiliatedor, simply put,losing face. They explain this further: Thus face is something thatis emotionally invested, and that can be lost, maintained, or enhanced,and must be constantly attended to in interaction (Brown and Levinson61). Brown and Levinson also point out that one individuals sense offace is dependent upon the continued maintenance of everyone elsessense of face. A threat to one individuals face, then, becomes athreat to all. Individuals in the community soon learn that it is intheir best interest to defend not only their own faces, but those ofthe other members of the community as well. Brown and Levinson discuss two kinds of linguistic politeness: positive politeness and negative politeness. Central to our model is a highly abstract notion of facewhich consists of two specific kinds of desires(face-wants) attributed by interactants to one another: thedesire to be unimpeded in ones actions (negative face), and the desire (in some respects) to be approved of (positive face)(13). Brown and Levinson offer fifteen strategies that speakers use to establish positive politeness: [H= addressee] 1. notice, attend to Hs interests, wants, needs, goods 2. exaggerate interest, approval, sympathy with H 3. intensify interest to H 4. use in-group identity markers -address forms -use of in-group language or dialect -use of jargon or slang -contraction and ellipsis 5. seek agreement 6. avoid disagreement 7. presuppose/raise/assert common groundgossip, small talk 8. joke 9. assert or presuppose Ss knowledge of and concern for Hs wants 10. offer, promise 11. be optimistic 12. include both S H in the activity, using we 13. give (or ask for reasons) 14. assume or assert reciprocity 15. give giftsgoods, sympathy, understanding, cooperation If positive politeness is defined as redress directed to theaddressees positive face, then negative politeness is redressiveaction addressed to the addressees negative face: his want to have hisfreedom of action unhindered and his attention unimpeded (129).Strategies used by speakers in the process of establishing negativeface include: 1. be conventionally indirectopposing tensions, indirect speech acts 2. question, hedge 3. be pessimistic 4. minimize the imposition 5. give deference 6. apologize 7. impersonalize S H 8. state the FTA [face-threatening act] as a general rules 9. nominalize 10. go on record as incurring a debt, or as not indebting H Brown and Levinson have a third category for speech actions. Thisone is off record. A communicative act is done off record if it isdoe in such a way that it is not possible to attribute only one clearcommunicative intention to the act (211). 1. give hints 2. give assocation clues 3. presuppose 4. understate 5. overstate 6. use tautologies 7. use contradictions 8. be ironic 9. use metaphors 10. use rhetorical questions 11. be ambiguous 12. be vague 13. over-generalize 14. displace H 15. be incomplete, use ellipsis Off record politeness is a sort of hybrid strategy that falls in between the two and is difficult, if not impossible to definitively categorize (Brown and Levinson, 230). 6a. Grimshaws concept of conflict talk In the introduction to his 1990 volume Conflict talk:Sociolinguistic investigations of arguments in conversations, AllenGrimshaw writes: Conflict talk is at the same time so complex a phenomenon andone so deeply implicated in every dimension of human sociallife that it would be possible to identify dozens of reasonswhy it should be a focus of systematic inquiry; by thesame token one would be left wondering why its study hasbeen so neglected (3). Grimshaw points out that conflicts may have as their focus a numberof subjects, including beliefs, objects (things), persons, groups, orinstitutions (294). Interestingly, he asserts that as long as conflicttalk is sustained and the participants do not withdraw, conflicts need not increase in hostility. The increase in hostilityseems to occur only with an increased sense of intensity on both sides 6b. Goodwin and Goodwin: interstitial argument In their essay Interstitial argument, Charles Goodwin andMarjorie Harness Goodwin present the findings of their researchregarding verbal conflict. During the course of their research theywere able to closely study the relationship between participants andtheir local environment. One thing they found is that despite thedisruptive behavior that accompanies an argument, the participants payextremely close attention to the details surrounding them. During theargument, what goes on is actually a process of very intricatecoordination between the parties who are opposing each other (85). For a year and a half M.H. Goodwin audiotaped a group of urbanblack children as they played together in the street. This was onesegment of a larger project in which a range of speech activities werebeing studies. These activities included gossip, arguments, stories,and directives, and similar activities. Specifically, four childrenwere audiotaped during oppositional exchanges, and these exchanges werethen transcribed and analyzed. One of the issues at hand was aslingshot battle. All exchanges, from the planning stages to theselection of teams to the preparation of weapons, were studied inmeticulous detail. From these data Goodwin examined content shift andcontext within argument, multi-party argument, and piggybacking, oraffiliation in argument. Analysing their findings, the Goodwins discovered that by followingthe sequence of utterances, it was clear that the four individualsinvolved in the exchange did not have equal positions (107). It seemedclear that each side had a primary spokesman, followed by a secondindividual who followed the behavior of the primary spokesman. This ledGoodwin and Goodwin to conclude that the structures utilised in theprocess of negotiating opposition also provide resources for theparticipants, enabling them to duplicate types of social organization.Thus, the process of arguing essentially gives the participants resources for reproducing a life that is greater than that of the argument itself (113). Finally, Goodwin and Goodwin write that it has been argued that thetalk people produce during their dealings with each other is oftenconsidered to be too disorderly to be properly organized and studied.In response to this, they write that in analysing the data from thisstudy they found anything but disorder. The participants themselves,within the space of a very few turns, produce a range of systematicpermutations on a basic structure with a precision that would tax theingenuity of even the most inventive experimental design to replicate'(114). 6c. Schiffrin: argument: the role of opinions and stories Deborah Schiffrin asserts that everyday forms of talk are guidedby norms of co-operation and competition. Even argument, a form of talkwhich might seem to be the paradigm example of conflict talk, can be aco-operative way of speaking as well as (or instead of) a competitiveway of speaking (241). Schriffin uses Goffmans concepts of footing and frame asadditional links. Footing and frames are very similar to eachother. Schriffin explains the frame as the definition of thesituation, and the footing as the sort of alignments taken up byparticipation (242). She then goes on to explore opinions and stories. With regard toopinions, she admits that it is not always possible to find linguisticfeatures which mark a declarative statement as the presentation of an opinion, and that because of this,one needs to look elsewhere, and she presents her criteria fordiscerning what an opinion actually consists of, concluding thatopinions are unverifiable, internal, subjective depictions of anexternal worldthe facts presented by the author cannot remainundisputed, but the principals stance toward that proposition cannotbe/ disputed 248-9). This, she explains, also gives opinions aparadoxical status in argument, such that they can either initiate orend an argument (249). She then discusses the role of stories, breaking them down into: selective interpretation deictic (time) shifts evaluation contextualization First of all, she asserts, one must consider that theinterpretation of stories is highly selective. Individuals will choosecertain stories and interpret them in a way that justifies certainbehaviors and actions. Second, there are deictic, or time shifts, to beconsidered. For example, frequently a speaker must re-orient him orherself back to the actual time of the story, to a time when they mighthave had less knowledge or information about the story. The thirdaspect of stories that Schiffrin finds significant are the evaluativedevices used by the storyteller. These devices can be phonological,grammatical, or textual in nature. Finally, she asserts, stories arepresented as frames within certain events are explained,contextualizing them. Text Analysis on Verbal Conflict, using examples from the screenplay of Trainspotting 1. Overview. Trainspotting is a coming-of-age story in story of a group ofheroin-addicted young people from Edinburgh. It is a very vividdepiction of junkie life as well as a cross-section of life in the 90s.The title of the book, Trainspotting, is also a term used in theBritish Isles for people who, as a hobby, keep track of local trainschedules with excessive vigilance. Essentially, the term is synonymouswith wasting time, making this activity a sort of metaphor for heroinaddiction. Both activities are essentially pointless and futile. Drugs are a central focus of the story, and in particular (but notexclusively) heroin. This is very clear from the language that is used.This can be noted from the frequency of the occurrence of terms whichrelate to heroin. There are numerous references to the sale,acquisition, preparation, injection, and withdrawal of heroin. Thedrug-related words which appear with highest frequency include hit,junk, shot, and inject, each of which appear more than ten times.Other commonly used drug words include of course the drugitselfheroinalong with its many variations, such as smack and skag. However, despite the omnipresence of drug and drug-relatedactivities, the story does not set out to glorify heroin use; neitherdoes it condemn or moralize use of the drug. It does, however, give aclear depiction of the bleak environment this group of young peoplemust survive in. The area is working-class. References are made to DSSchecks and Giro, which are terms associated with the life of povertyand struggle. This dismal backdrop, and the fact that they have littlehope of physical escape, makes their wreckless behaviour a bit moreunderstandable. Their addictions seem to be the most reliable, if notthe only, escape. Trainspotting is very definitely a movie about youth culture. Itshows an intricate understanding of the issues and influences uponyouth at that period in time, and it realistically reflects thecultural experiences had by young people. Trainspotting appeals to acult-prone youth because it contains the elements that comprisefoundations of subculture in British culture. Alt hough other worksappealed to the youth culture of that period, Trainspotting enjoyed apopularity that exceeded most of them. This may have been due to itsauthenticity in replicating the youth culture experience. When it first premiered (and even now), the graphic detail ofits language and content was found to be rather shocking by some.However, it resonated very strongly with anyone familiar with drugculture. It reflects, sometimes quite graphically, the underbelly ofEdinburgh in the 1980s, and focuses, as mentioned earlier, mainly onone group of heroin addicts, as well as their friends and families.Their experiences as they struggle with very real issues that many canidentify with: life, work, family, death, the struggle to survive.Other issuesones that may not have been part of mainstream culturearepresented as well: AIDS, heroin overdose, heroin withdrawal, and raves,among others. The use of dialect is very powerful in Trainspotting. Inaddition, the social, political, and economic views expressed by thecharacters would have mirrored the views of societys fringemembersspecifically members of the youth and/or drug cultures. Renton and his mates do not rebel against society, but they doattempt to transcend in their destructive ways. Renton often parodiesfamous Thatcher quotes through his Choose life rants and frequentcomments regarding the emptiness of society, as demonstrated in thefollowing examples from the screenplay: Choose life. Choose a job. Choose a career. Choose a family.Choose a fucking big television, choose washing machines, cars, compactdisc players, and electrical tin openers. Choose good health, low cholesterol, and dental insurance. Choosefixed-interest mortgage repayments. Choose a starter home. Choose yourfriends. Choose leisurewear and matching luggage. Choose a three-piece suiton hire purchase in a range of fucking fabrics. Choose DIY andwondering who the fuck you are on a Sunday morning. Choose sitting onthat couch watching mind-numbing, spirit-crushing game shows, stuffingfucking junk food into your mouth. Choose rotting away at the endof it all, pishing your last in a miserable home, nothing more than anembarrassment to the selfish, fucked-up brats you have spawned toreplace yourself. Choose your future. Choose life. I chose not to choose life. I chose something else. And thereasons? There are no reasons. Who needs reasons when youve gotheroin? The lifestyle portrayed in Trainspotting has been described asrepresenting a detached subculture of British youth. However, thereis no evidence in the screenplay to support this assertion. The youngcharacters in this story simply attempt to survive in the largerenvironment by adapting in whatever ways they can, primarily throughmusic and through drugs. They do not attempt to change the status quo,nor are they champions of social reform. They simply react to the bleaksocial conditions that they were born into. Unable to physically escape their environment, they find release in music, drugs, alcohol, and sex. Renton is a prime example of this. He is not proactive, he issimply a survivor. He assesses situations with the manipulative eye ofan addict, and he reacts accordingly, taking advantage when he sees theopportunity. He and his contemporaries are merely representative ofyouth who are struggling for a sense of identity. Their mindset isambiguous; they react to outside societal pressures by employing theirchosen means. But they cannot be considered as a youth subculture basedon their language that has been described in the previous section. Language The language used in the screenplay is clearly a reflection of thetime. In addition to the frequency of drug-related words, as discussedabove, there are a number of terms that may be considered vulgar, or atleast not acceptable, words. These usually refer to bodily functions.For example the word fuck appears in one form or another over onehundred times in the screenplay. The word cunt is another example. Generally speaking, the wordcunt can be used to refer to any person, even a friend, but it isusually used to refer to an enemy or someone one does not particularlylike. However, in Hodges screenplay, it is used in a different way. Itappears with relative frequency, approximately 16 separate occasions,some of which are shown below: . Examples from Renton: 1. The only drawback, or at least the principal drawback, is that you have to endure all manner of cunts telling you that. 2. Under the normal run of things, I would have had nothing to do with the cunt, but this was not the normal run of things. 3. If they think youre not trying, youre in trouble. First hint ofthat, theyll be on to the DSS, This cunts no trying, and your Girois fucking finished, right? Examples from Begbie: 1. Then this hard cunt comes in. Obviously fancied himself. Starts looking at me. 2. So what does the hard cunt do, or so-called hard cunt? 3. It was fucking obvious that that cunt was going to fuck some cunt. 4. Well, you know me, Im no lookin for trouble but at the end ofthe day Im the cunt with the pool cue and Im game for a swedge. 5. You daft cunt. 6. Sorrys no going to dry me off, you cunt. As evidenced by the lines from Renton, the term cunt here isquite versatile. In Example 1, cunts refers to members of themainstream society, individuals who have power and authority, somethingthat Renton and his crew decidedly do not. In Example 2, it is used asan almost everyday, casual expression for females. It does have aslightly negative connotation, but the general attitude towards womenis negative throughout. Therefore it is difficult to make thisdetermination. In Example 3, cunt refers back to the self. Renton isreferring to how the cunts in Example 1 would theoretically refer tohim as a cunt who is not putting forth an effort. In the selections from Begbie, Examples 1 and 2, cunt is aderogatory use of the word for a woman. In Example 3, it refers toother males. Example 4 is another instance of cunt referring back tothe self in a negative manner. Examples 5 and 6 demonstrate exampleswhere cunt is used as a form of direct address to females. Excerpt of Screenplay by John Hodge: Renton turns to see Begbie making his way through the crowd with thepints held precariously. A Man standing with a group of friendsaccidentally nudges Begbie, causing a pint to spill over him. BEGBIE: For fucks sake. MAN: Sorry, mate, Ill get you another. BEGBIE: All down my fucking front, you fucking idiot. MAN: Look, Im sorry, I didnt mean it. BEGBIE: Sorrys no going to dry me off, you cunt. RENTON: Cool down, Franco, the guys sorry. BEGBIE: Not sorry enough for being a fat cunt. MAN: Fuck you. If you cant hold a pint, then you shouldnt be in the pub, mate, now fuck off. Begbie drops the remaining three pints. As the man looks down to thefalling glasses, Begbie smashes the fourth pint in his face. A fight breaks out between the Man and Begbie. Sick Boy and Spud rushin to restrain Begbie. Renton sits still, not even looking at the fightor what follows. His eyes are fixed on the bag while his hands fiddle. Gumperz concept of a speech community, or a system of organizeddiversity held together by common norms and aspirations, does not seemto adequately describe the community of Begbie, Sick Boy, Spud, andRenton in this scene. They may have similar aspirations in terms ofcompleting a drug deal. Also, they may have similar value systems,considering the fact that they share a disregard for values that areordinarily esteemed in mainstream society. Gumperz also discusses the role of communicative skills in oursociety. He states that these skills are now much different than theywere in the past, requiring a complex level of expertise to establish asense of order in ones life and to acquire a sense of personal controland direction. According to Gumperz, it is absolutely essential forindividuals in todays society to be capable of managing or adapting toa variety of diverse communicative situations. In addition, they mustbe able to interact freely with people who are virtual strangers tothem. These are abilities that Gumperz finds indispensable. In the scene above, it is clear that the communicative skills ofBegbie are not quite at what Gumperz would consider an acceptablelevel. He is unable manage his behavior, and he is unable to adapt wellto a diverse communicative situation. In addition, he appears unable tointeract freely with a virtual stranger. Whether this is due to lack ofskill or lack of desire, the end resultconflictremains the same. In keeping with Gumperz ideas, the skills required to function atthis level must be mastered if one is to function autonomously as amember of a speech community. It may be argued that Begbie, Sick Boy,Spud, and Renton do function, albeit on a rather limited level. SickBoy and Spud do step and try to control the escalating situation, butthis is actually damage control, not autonomous functioning. Inaddition, Rentons focus is completely diverted; in this scene, he isclearly not an autonomous member of a speech community. Halliday explains the initial acquisition of language as part of thedevelopment of the child as a social creature. The child does this, sheexplains, through associations with family, neighbourhood, and varioussocial groups; these comprise the foundation on which the child baseshis or her belief systems and values. She develops her concept of theantisociety by stating that is direct contrast to society.Antisociety, according to Halliday, is a conscious alternative, a formof resistance, which can be passive, at least overtly, or hostile, tothe point of being destructive. The antilanguage, then, is thelanguage of the antisociety. It is part of the antisociety which hasgenerated it. Applying this theory to Trainspotting in general does not seem tobe effective. Renton and his mates cannot be said to be rebellingagainst a belief system that they assimilated as children. They stillshare the basic values of their families. Therefore, if they were trulymembers of an antisociety, and speaking the antilanguage thusgenerated, they would have swung towards the other poleback towardsmainstream, acceptable society. However, having been born and raisedin a society that might itself be considered antisociety, this theorydoes not apply here. The exchange could be seen as argumentative, or at the veryleast highly provocative. Applying Labovs sounding theory, this wouldbe an example of when ritual insult passes over into a different levelof discourse. This is clearly an interpersonal conflict; the differencebetween this and ritual insult, or sounding, is very clear. According to Labov, audience reaction is a key tool in assessingsounds. Laughter, the primary mark of affirmation, is noticeably absentin this scene. Neither are there negative comments. Instead, theaudience, which consists of Sick Boy, Spud, and Renton, reactdifferently. Sick Boy and Spud take direct physical action, rushing into control Begbie and to contain the situation from further agitation.Rentons response is actually a lack of response: he is focused onsomething totally apart from what is going on with Begbie and the Man. Goffman writes that the ritual order seems to be organizedbasically on accommodative lines, and that these lines allowindividuals to build and maintain illusions about themselves, and arenot governed by laws or justice. Rather, Goffman asserts, the mainprinciple of the ritual order is not justice but face. In regards toRenton et al., this is questionable. In the first place, Renton and hiscrew do not have many illusions about themselvesat any rate, certainlynot positive ones. Goffman speaks of individuals crossing a line; thisline is non-existent in Rentons world. It may have existed at onetime, but it has long since been crossed. Goffman also asserts that the ways in which individualsinsulate themselves are include half-truths, illusions, andrationalizations. Though it can be argued that Renton and his matescertainly do indulge in all of these things, it is certainly not toinsulate themselves: for that, they have drugs, alcohol, and otherequally self-destructive behaviors. Goffman also asserts that an incidence of verbal conflict requiresthe individual upon whom the offense has been committed to react insome way, and that the type of reaction will depend on the level ofoffense. Therefore, if a person is offended by another individual, butcan let the incident go without losing too much face, then it islikely that the offended person will let the situation go, perhapsthinking they will confront it at a later, more opportune time. If theoffense committed against the person is great, an action must be takenby the offended person. They may decide to withdraw from the situationand may avoid future encounters with individuals who break the ritualcode. Alternately, they may arrange to have the offending personremoved, thus ensuring that there will be no further communicationnecessary with this individual. In the passage above, there is no indication that Begbie had anyinclination to stop and think about the level of injury inflictedduring this accidental encounter; neither did he consider the resultsof his actions. He simply reacted in a very impulsive way, which is theonly way he knew. He acted before he had a chance to thinkin Begbiesworld, this would be considered normal behavior. Societies must mobilize their members as self-regulatingparticipants in social encounters Goffman asserts. Ritual is one wayof doing this. Members of society are taught the importance of face,and that they should value such qualities as pride, honor, dignity, andpoise (110). However, in Begbies world, the concepts of pride, honor,dignity, and poise have very different definitions. Brown and Levinson suggest that an individuals sense of face isdependent upon the continued maintenance of everyone elses sense offace. A threat to one individuals face, then, becomes a threat to all.Individuals in the community soon learn that it is in their bestinterest to defend not only their own faces, but those of the othermembers of the community as well. Then break this category down into two main categories oflinguistic politeness: positive politeness and negative politeness,and a third category, which they call off record. The latter categoryis used in cases that do not easily fit into the first two divisions. By using the criteria stipulated by Brown and Levinson, it isapparent that several dynamics are at play. Initially, the passage fromthe screenplay appears to employ several of the strategies that Brownand Levinson describe as ways to establish positive face. However,upon further examination, it becomes apparent that strategies from thecategory of negative politeness are evident as well. Application ofthe third category, the off-record category, further complicatesmatters. Thus it appears impossible to accurately place this excerpt oftext in any of the categories suggested by Brown and Levinson. Grimshaws theory of conflict talk is based on the premise thatconflicts are focused subjects that include belief systems,object/things, persons, groups, or institutions, and that the conflicttalk will be sustained as long as the participants do not withdraw.This theory does not apply to the passage above. Goodwin and Goodwin defy the assertion that the talk people produceduring their interactions is often considered to be too disorderly tobe properly organized and studied. In response to this, they write thatin analysing the data from this study they found anything butdisorder. The participants themselves, within the space of a very fewturns, produce a range of systematic permutations on a basic structurewith a precision that would tax the ingenuity of even the mostinventive experimental design to replicate (114). The exchange betweenBegbie and the Man is truncated before any such order is discernible.The involvement of additional individuals, specifically Sick Boy andSpud, only lends to the sense of disorder. The ultimate escalation ofevents into the resulting violence forces a final situation of chaos,which does not fit in with the theory put forth by Goodwin and Goodwin. Schriffin uses Goffmans concepts of footing and frame asadditional links. Footing and frames are very similar to eachother. Schriffin explains the frame as the definition of thesituation, and the footing as the sort of alignments taken up byparticipation (242). She continues her discussion by exploringopinions and stories. With regard to opinions, she admits that it isnot always possible to find linguistic features which mark adeclarative statement as the presentation of an opinion, and thatbecause of this, one needs to look elsewhere. Her ultimate conclusionis that opinions are basically unverifiable, internal, subjectivedepictions of an external world. This, she explains, also givesopinions a paradoxical status in argument, such that they can eitherinitiate or end an argument (249). In the confrontation between Begbieand the Man, stories and opinions do not come into play. Begbiesnonverbal message of smashing the pint in the Mans face ends theencounter abruptly, and renders all fur ther communication pointless. This dissertation set out to explore a number of importantlinguistic theories in order to analyze the language of John Hodgesscreenplay, Trainspotting, which is thought by many to containsub-cultural and social contexts that cause it to be interpretedlinguistically as a youth subculture piece. However, a close look atthe language of this screenplay makes clear that this is a story of theunderbelly of Edinburgh, populated by characters who are haunted by anumber of issues and addictions. The world these characters inhabit isbleak and hopeless, and their days are filled with the futile searchfor temporary respite through artificial, chemical solace. This is a world bereft of hope, plagued by poverty, addiction,violence, and AIDs, among other issues. As such, it may berepresentative of a sub-culture of sorts, but this is a consequence ofthe environment, not a linguistic construct based on linguistic theory. The verbal conflict formation in the text should be read as reflectiveof the larger worldview that verbal conflict behaviour is inevitable inall societies, as are the existence of social dialects and the usage of common slang. Bavelas, Janet, Rogers, L. Edna, and Millar, Frank. 1985.Interpersonal Conflict. Pp. 9 26 in T. van Dijk, ed., Handbook ofDiscourse Analysis Volume 4: Discourse Analysis in Society. London:Academic Press. Brown, Penelope and Levinson, Stephen. 1978. Politeness: Someuniversals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dijk, Teun A. van. 1985. Handbook of Discourse Analysis Volume 4: Discourse Analysis in Society. London: Academic Press. Glossary of Drug-Related Slang (Street Language) https://www.uta.fi/FAST/AV5B/drugslan.html. Accessed August 3, 2005. Goodwin, Charles and Goodwin, Marjorie Harness. 1990. Interstitialargument. Pp. 85117 in A. Grimshaw (ed.), Conflict talk:Sociolinguistic investigations of arguments in conversations.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Goffman, E.. 1997. The Goffman Reader. Lemert, Charles and Branaman, Ann, eds. Oxford: Blackwell. Grimshaw, Allen, ed. 1990. Conflict talk: Sociolinguisticinvestigations of arguments in conversations. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press. Grimshaw, Allen. 1990. Research on conflict talk: antecedents,resources, findings, directions. Pp. 280324.in 259 in.A. Grimshaw(ed.), Conflict talk: Sociolinguistic investigations of argumentsin conversations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gumperz, John. 1982. Discourse strategies. London: Cambridge University Press. Gumperz, John, ed. 1982. Language and social identity. London: Cambridge University Press. Gumperz, John and Jenny Cook-Gumperz. 1982. Introduction: language andthe communication of social identity. Pp. 121 in Gumperz, John,ed. 1982. Language and social identity. London: CambridgeUniversity Press. Hansell, Mark and Seabrook Ajirotutu, Cheryl. 1982. Negotiatinginterpretations in interethnic settings. Pp. 8594 in J. Gumperz,(ed.), 1982. Language and social identity. London: CambridgeUniversity Press. Halliday, M.A.K. 1978. Language as social semiotic: The socialinterpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward ArnoldPublishers. Labov, W. 1972a. Rules for ritual insults. Pp. 120169 in D. Sudnowed., Studies in social interaction. New York: Free Press. Labov, W. 1972b. Language in the Inner City: Studies in the BlackEnglish Vernacular. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Schiffrin, Deborah. 1990. The management of a co-operative self duringargument: the role of opinions and stories. Pp. 241259 in.A.Grimshaw (ed.), Conflict talk: Sociolinguistic investigations ofarguments in conversations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Totah, Karina. Trainspottings Playlist: A Compilation of Subcultural Struggles. https://www.brightlightsfilm.com/44/train.htm. Accessed August 3, 2005.

Wednesday, May 6, 2020

The Development Of Morals - 1700 Words

The development of morals is an often studied topic in psychology. However, there is a debate over whether morality is learned, or something humans are born with. A number of experiments have shown that the latter may be a large part of the truth. Infants seem to have basic concepts of empathy, helping others, and punishment before they can speak or participate in society. However, humans continue to develop their morals throughout their lives. These findings simply support the idea that there is an evolved base moral core that is present in all humans from birth. Many prominent child psychologists have regarded infants as amoral. Psychologists of this view would argue that infants have no understanding of morals until they are taught†¦show more content†¦Moral-like behaviors have also been observed in animals, such as chimpanzees and dogs. Chimpanzees conform to rules, share, do favors, comfort others, and engage in many other activities that resemble morality. Researchers then concluded that if these behaviors evolved in animals so genetically similar to us, they probably evolved in humans as well (Berk, 2013). However, these moral behaviors do seem to be much more developed and common in humans. Humans are accepted to be born with many evolved traits such as the ability to learn language and attach to the mother, so it is not far-fetched that we could be born with a basic moral code as well. According to one study, â€Å"as has been argued for humans’ ‘core’ understanding of certain conceptual domainsâ€⠀including objects, numbers, geometry, agents, and groups [...]—there may be aspects of morality that emerge in the absence of specific experiences [...] or being explicitly taught which acts are right and which are wrong† (Hamlin 2013). This quote explains that other human qualities and understandings seem to be universal and built in, meaning morality may very well be in this group. Infants seem to approve of helping others, a major facet of morality. Using data from puppet shows, researchers have shown that babies almost always choose the more helpful puppet. In the shows, one puppet will attempt to open a box. One character will help them openShow MoreRelatedMoral Development : Moral And Character Development886 Words   |  4 PagesMoral and Character Development Although moral development has addressed from different models or approaches to psychological and educational, it is the cognitive-developmental approach; they are given more importance. For the definition of the cognitive, means that moral development has its bases in the stimulation of the reasoning of the person about circumstances and decisions regarding situations of interpersonal relationship. The role of thinking is necessary, and above all the how andRead MoreMoral And Moral Development Of The Army751 Words   |  4 PagesPromote Moral Development 1LT Farlin Reynoso Moral is the concerns to what is right and wrong in human behavior (Merriam-Webster). As chaplains, we are agents of what right looks like in all moral issues in the Army. Many moral issues affects the lives of Soldiers, Civilians, and Families, affecting effectiveness of service command climate, unit readiness, and cohesion (AR 165–1, 9–10a). From the lowest private to the highest-ranking officer, we all need to promote a moral develop in our organizationRead MoreMoral Development And Moral Judgement1112 Words   |  5 PagesMoral development and moral judgement has always been an interesting topic for psychologists and philosophers. It plays an important role in our life on a regular basis. Lawrence Kohlberg developed the theory of moral development from both a psychological as well as a philosophical perspective where he melded the hard stage developmental model that was employed by Jean Piaget with major philosophical questions (Kohlberg, 1976). Kohlberg et al. ( 1984) created and described six stages of moral developmentRead MoreMoral Development of an Adolescent1556 Words   |  7 PagesIn his Stages of Moral Development, Lawrence Kohlberg states that human beings progress from a Preconventional Level of moral development (in which they refer to rules imposed by others) to a Postconventional Level of moral development (in which they refer to rules imposed from within themselves). Just as Kohlberg states, adolescents undergo moral growth in stages. They may be easily influenced by peers or by environmental cues, but most teens grow to assert impressive measures of responsibilityRead MoreThe Theory Of Moral Development1436 Words   |  6 Pagesthat there are 3-levels of Moral Development, as well as 6-stages within Moral Development. The 3-levels include pre-conventional morality, conventional morality, and post conventional morality. The 6-stages include obedience and punishment orientation, individualism and exchange, good interpersonal relationships, maintaining social order, social contract and individual rights, and universal principles (McLleod, 2011). This paper will discuss all 3-levels of moral development and where my ethical reasoningRead MoreMoral Development Essay592 Words   |  3 PagesThe moral development of a person’s character will have a major impact on society as a whole. If we fail to show children moral responsibility they in turn will lack the moral and ethical sense of values. The critical importance of the early years remains crucial to all later development. With all the violence and unsuitable language in film, television, and music today’s society poses an even larger threat on children. Moral functioning involves self-esteem, self-control, and altruistic behaviorRead MoreThe Theory Of Moral Development Essay1398 Words   |  6 PagesThe theory of moral development was developed by psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg and is a very interesting subject that stemmed from Jean Piag et’s theory of moral reasoning. this theory helped us to develop the understanding that morality starts from the early childhood years and can be affected by several factors. This theory encompasses the ideas that moral reasoning, which is considered the basis for moral behavior, has six identifiable developmental stages. According to Kohlberg the six stagesRead MoreJustice and Moral Development925 Words   |  4 Pagesin that they believe in this concept to make a loss better. Many individuals will see law enforcement agencies, especially the officers that work for an agency, to be the tool that will be used to garner their justice. Kohlberg’s stages of moral development theory can help to explain criminal behavior in that a criminal that acts out for a particular reason will not be able to understand the stages that are beyond the one that they are in, such as only being interested in pleasing themselves. UsingRead MoreSocial and Moral Development1112 Words   |   5 PagesIn this paper, I will be explaining the stages of social and moral development children experience from early childhood through adolescence. I will also be comparing the social and emotional development of the children in each of the age groups that I selected in Week Six, which were early childhood and middle childhood. There are six stages of social and moral development that children will experience from early childhood to adolescence. The six stages are broken down into three levels. The firstRead MoreSorayas Moral Development1202 Words   |  5 PagesSoraya’s Moral Development Soraya Taheri is one of Khaled Hosseini’s characters in The Kite Runner, who represents what a true woman and wife should be like. She is an example of Kohlberg’s classification of three levels of moral development in humans. Even though there is not a lot of information in the novel given about Soraya, her personality can be reviewed based on her behavior throughout the story. The reader first meets with Soraya in chapter 11, when she is working at a flea market. Her

Rhetoric and Mark Twain free essay sample

â€Å"In the first place, God made idiots. That was for practice. Then he made school boards. † (Mark Twain). The educational essay written by Jonathan Kozol titled â€Å"Still Separated, Still Unequal†, is much like the quote by Mark Twain. This essay shows how today’s’ school system is still separated and unequal according to a person’s skin color or race even though the court case of ‘Brown vs. Board of Education’ supposedly resolved this. Kozol’s essay is written particularly for educated students and adults in order to inform the reader that school systems of today are still separated and unequal. Kozol uses inductive reasoning along with logical development, other persuasive appeals, and rhetorical devices to develop his argument. Jonathan Kozol uses reasoning or logic to prove that the school systems of today are separated and unequal for students based on the color of their skin or their race. An example of this is when the writer informs the reader of the exact percentages of students by race in schools across the country, â€Å"In Chicago 87% of public-school enrolment was black or Hispanic; less than 10% was white. We will write a custom essay sample on Rhetoric and Mark Twain or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page In Washington D. C. , 94% black or Hispanic; to less than 5% white. In New York City, nearly three quarters of the students were black or Hispanic. † (239-240). The use of pure facts instead of personal opinions makes this issue seem like a real problem instead of just one man’s opinion. Another way logic is used within this essay is when the writer shares a personal experience, â€Å"In a school I visited in the fall of 2004 in Kansas City, Missouri, for example, a document distributed to visitors reports that the school’s curriculum â€Å"addresses the needs of children from diverse backgrounds. †Ã¢â‚¬ ¦I learned that 99. 6 percent of students there were African American. † (242). In this use of logic, the writer uses facts to help the reader understand that there are areas of unequal and separated treatment within the school system of today. Within this essay there are also uses of other persuasive appeals, including pathos and ethos. Pathos is used in this essay in order to link it with a reader’s emotions while ethos is used to show the writer’s moral character. Pathos is used when the writer speaks to a student of the Bronx, â€Å"Think of it this way,† said a sixteen-year-old girl. â€Å"If people in New York woke up one day and learned that we were gone†¦how would they feel? I think they’d be relieved. † (424). This part of the essay is used to make the reader feel guilty that this girl lived in a society where she grew up feeling everyone did not care about her or others of her race. Both pathos and ethos are used when the writer speaks to a principal of a South Bronx school while they looking at a collapsed section of the ceiling, which was covered by a garbage bag, â€Å"This†¦would not happen to white children. † (244). The use of ethos affects the reader’s emotions and makes them want to help this school system.

Monday, April 20, 2020

Plants And Diseases That Ravaged The Western Hemisphere Essays

Plants And Diseases That Ravaged The Western Hemisphere PLANTS AND DISEASES IN THE WESTERN WORLD In 1215, a man named Marco Polo embarked on a journey towards Western Asia and China. His reason for going to Asia was to gain spices, silks, and other luxurious items only the Asians made. Along his journey, Polo soon realized that the Earth was larger than he thought and that there must be some easier way to get to china. Not too long after his journey, the Ottoman Turks conquouered Constantinople. Constantinople (present day Istanbul) is the city, in Turkey, that divides Eastern Europe from Western Asia. Constantinople (which was previously held by European Christians) was a major port and trading center for the Europeans. It was also a major turnpike in the only safe route to Asia. Basically, the only way one could get to Asia, was through Constantinople. Since the Ottoman Turks held this city and charged outrageous prices on goods, another route to Asia was sought out by the Europeans. Vasco De Gamma found a water route, around Africa, to get to Asia. But it was Christopher Colu mbuss choice in a water route to Asia that changed the world forever. Columbus sailed west, along the Atlantic, to get to Eastern Asia. However, Columbus did not know there was a HUGE landmass blocking him from Asia. This landmass was North and South America. Columbus landed on Barbados and brought with him some fellow sailors, food, and a few personal items. However. Columbus did not know that by landing on Barbados, he would create a European frenzy to conqueror the New World. By the 1700s Europeans accomplished this goal. They accomplished this goal with the help of thousands of Europeans with guns and the help of foreign organisms and diseases. If these organisms and diseases did not sack the Natives the way they did, maybe today we would be speaking a Native language instead of English. The very first organisms that reached the New World were, of course, human beings from Europe. Along with these humans, came European plants. The Europeans who chose to settle the Americas needed to bring European animals, such as sheep, cattle, horses, etc. In order to feed these animals, Europeans needed to bring European plants. When these plants were introduced to the fertile American land, they started spreading like wildfire and destroyed every Native, weaker plant in their way. Because all the Native plants were being pushed aside by the stronger European plants, Native animals who fed on the Native plants began disappearing. Maybe they disappeared due to starvation. Maybe they disappeared due to being shot and killed by European farmers because they were feeding on their crops. There are numerous possibilities. Not only were herbivores hurt by these new plants, but omnivores and carnivores were also hurt. Meat-eating animals found it very hard to find plant-eating prey. Becau se of this, some meat-eating animals disappeared due to the lack of food. Native Americans were also hurt by these new plants. These plants destroyed the plants the Natives consumed. Therefore they had to move to new land that had not been infected with the European plants. They also had to move because the buffalo and deer they fed on moved because of the European onslaught. This, in turn, opened up more land for the Europeans to move into. Plants were very important in helping the Europeans take over the New World. But these new plants were not as deadly and effective as the new diseases Europeans brought. Before the Europeans discovered the New World, the had to deal with diseases such as measles, mumps, smallpox, dysentery, the plaque, and other diseases. Over time, they began becoming immune to these diseases. When the Europeans began settling the New World, they unknowingly brought these diseases with them. The Natives had no immunity to these diseases and began dropping like flies. Hundreds of thousands of Natives died from these diseases. The Aztecs, Incas, and most of the Eastern American tribes were decimated by European disease. Because more and more Natives began dying, the European conquerors encountered less and less Native resistance. The less the resistance, the easier it became for the Europeans to dominate the Americas. Not only

Sunday, March 15, 2020

Ten Reasons to Learn English

Ten Reasons to Learn English Here are ten reasons to learn English - or any language really. Weve chosen these ten reasons as they express a wide range of not only learning goals, but also personal goals. 1. Learning English Is Fun   We should rephrase this: learning English can be fun. For many students, it isnt much fun. However, we think thats just a problem of how you learn English. Take time to have fun learning English by listening to music, watching a movie, challenging yourself to games in English. There are so many opportunities to learn English while having fun. Theres no excuse not to enjoy yourself, even if you have to learn grammar. 2. English Will Help You Succeed in Your Career This is obvious to anyone who lives in our modern world. Employers want employees who speak English. This might not be fair, but it is the reality. Learning English to take a test such as the IELTS or TOEIC will give you a qualification that others might not have, and that might help you get the job you need. 3. English Opens Up International Communications You are on the internet learning English right now. We all know the world needs more love and understanding. What better way to improve the world than to communicate in English (or other languages) with those from other cultures?! 4. Learning English Will Help Open Your Mind We believe that we are all brought up to see the world in one way. Thats a good thing, but at a certain point, we need to expand our horizons. Learning English will help you understand the world through a different language. Understanding the world through a different language will also help you view the world from a different perspective. In other words, learning English helps to open your mind. 5. Learning English Will Help Your Family Being able to communicate in English can help you reach out and discover new information. This new information could help save the life of someone in your family. Well, it certainly can help you help the other people in your family who dont speak English. Just imagine yourself on a trip and you are responsible for communicating with others in English. Your family will be very proud. 6. Learning English Will Keep Alzheimers Away Scientific research says that using your mind to learn something helps keep your memory intact. Alzheimers - and other diseases dealing with brain functions - isnt nearly as powerful if youve kept your brain flexible by learning English. 7. English Will Help You Understand Those Crazy Americans and Brits Yes, American and British cultures are  rather strange at times. Speaking English will certainly give you insight into why these cultures are so crazy! Just think, you will understand English cultures, but they probably wont understand yours because they dont speak the language. Thats a real advantage in so many ways. 8. Learning English  Will Help You Improve Your Sense of Time English is obsessed with verb tenses. In fact, there are twelve tenses in English. Weve noticed that this is not the case in many other languages. You can be sure that by learning English you will gain a keen sense of when something happens due to the English languages use of time expressions. 9. Learning English Will Allow You to Communicate in Any Situation Chances are that someone will speak English no matter where you are. Just imagine you are on a deserted island with people from all over the world. Which language will you speak? Probably English! 10. English Is the World Language OK, OK, this is an obvious point weve already made. More people speak Chinese, more nations have Spanish as their mother tongue, but, realistically. English is the language of choice throughout the world today.

Friday, February 28, 2020

Toxicological poisoning Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Toxicological poisoning - Essay Example The potential of carbon monoxide for toxicological poisoning is manifested when it is inhaled by members of the household. The harmful effect caused by the inhalation of carbon monoxide is that these toxic chemical compounds combines with the hemoglobin in the blood, thus preventing the body from absorbing oxygen and the adverse result is asphyxiation. The treatment of asphyxiation is to make use of artificial respiration to prevent the patient from dying (Klaasen, 2001). Dishwashing liquids are usually in the kitchen and are used for washing utensils. These dishwashing liquids are actually toxic in nature and are poisonous when mistakenly swallowed. In order to prevent people from mistakenly swallowing these dishwashing liquids, they should be put in their right containers. The utensils that are washed with these dishwashing liquids should also be properly rinsed with water in order to remove any sign of the dishwashing liquids from them. These precautions would go a long way in red ucing the harmful effects caused by swallowing these dishwashing liquids. Note that people that mistakenly swallow these dishwashing liquids usually complain of stomach cramps and other stomach related illnesses. In order to reduce the effect of swallowing these dishwashing liquids, one should use purgatives (Klaasen, 2001). Laundry detergents as the name implies are chemical substances that are used for laundry purposes.