Chapter 1:
Chapter 1 emphasizes the point that academic writing is largely argumentative writing. Furthermore, to write as well as possible it is imperative that the writer not only acknowledge the other side of the debate, but make it a prominent element of what’s being written.
The argument—and what you are writing—needs to be framed in the greater context of the “conversation”. Therefore, the opposite point of view of the author’s must be presented early in the writing and regularly touched upon throughout the piece. On page 25 the authors express the importance of framing your argument. “After summarizing the ideas you are responding to at the outset, it’s very important to continue to keeps those ideas in view. Readers won’t be able to follow your unfolding response, much less any complications you may offer, unless you keep reminding them what claims you are responding to”.
Chapter 2:
Chapter 2 talks about the next logical step in the writing process after acknowledging the arguments that you are responding to: summarizing those arguments. In order to give weight to your argument, it is essential to do a good job at accurately and fully summarizing the counter-points. “…It is extremely important that you go back to what those others have said, and that you study it very closely, and that you do not collapse it to something you already have heard or know. Writers who do this end up essentially conversing with themselves…” Graff and Birkenstein feel that a writer needs to almost suspend his own beliefs for a short time in order to accurately portray the counter-argument. However, they feel that a good summary can add strength to writing in that an author can tailor this summary to fits his “own overall agenda”. They feel this strategy of fitting the counter-argument into the context of your own is a very important tool for writers, and provide many examples and templates on how to do it effectively. Graff and Birkenstein feel strongly that a simple summary of counter-points is boring and ineffective, and urge the use of “vivid and precise signal verbs as often as possible”.
Chapter 3:
“The Art of Quoting”. In order to accurately summarize the arguments of others, using actual quotes of an opposing-viewed author can be the most effective method. Graff and Birkenstein say, “Quoting someone else’s words gives a tremendous amount of credibility to your summary and helps insure that it is fair and accurate”.
However, simply infusing a quote or two is often not sufficient. Not accurately framing the quote or explaining its context will lead to confusion and poor writing. Graff and Birkenstein explain that, although quoting is important, it is at least as important to “…present them in a way that makes their relevance and meaning clear to the readers”. “Dangling” quotations (those inserted into text without adequate explanation and framing) often lead a reader confused. A proper framework around a quote not only explains the quotes relevance, but also allows an author to meld the ways in which that quote supports his argument.
Chapter 4:
After talking extensively about how to present the counter-argument in writing, beginning in this chapter Graff and Birkenstein begin the process of teaching how to present the writer’s argument—the “I say”.
Like all of their advice, the authors urge simplicity when doing this, and suggest that to begin with the most effective strategy is to first illustrate your basic position. State, up front and in no uncertain terms, whether you agree, disagree, or both, with the opposing view.
Graff and Birkenstein present several examples of ways to effectively explain your stance, but it is an imperative that you explain why you feel the way you do. Even if you agree with another’s point of view, Graff and Birkenstein feel that a writer can add heft to the “conversation” by adding previously unstated supporting evidence to a writer’s claim.
Chapter 5:
This chapter addresses the fact that in good academic writing (that which is argumentative) there will invariably be a discourse between two or more trains of thought. It is important that there is clear distinction between who is saying what, and that there is no confusion by the reader in determining precisely what the author is trying to convey, both in terms of his argument and what he’s providing for evidence for the counter-argument.
The chapter provides myriad techniques and examples for ways to clearly mark who, or whose argument, is doing the talking. Instead of using “overt voice markers like ‘X argues’” Graff and Birkenstein urge using less prominent, but just as effective, techniques that refer to a counter-argument in your writing.
Chapter 6:
In this chapter the authors point out the advantages of embedding criticisms and counter-arguments within your writing. Although many may think that this would weaken their stance, Graff and Birkenstein feel that anticipating adversarial thoughts in your text can actually strengthen your position and enrich your writing. This approach allows a writer to more thoroughly and effectively present his own arguments, thus making a stronger case. Not doing so can make writing seem too narrowly focused and rather circumspect. Doing so will increase your opportunity to present your evidence, and engaging others in an active argument will make for more interesting reading.
Chapter 7:
This chapter describes the importance of “Saying Why it Matter”. As students, writers can often research and feel strongly about a topic but fail to imply why the topic or argument is important. The fact that it is important to the writer, though, is of little consequence to the reader, so the reader needs to be informed of the relevance of the argument. Graff and Birkenstein present several techniques for providing reasons why the reader should care what the writer is conveying. One of the more interesting strategies is for the writer to tie the topic to something that he figures the reader already cares about; to link your argument to a “larger matter that readers already deem important”.
Chapter 8:
Chapter 8 discusses the importance of tying all the parts of your writing together; creating a smooth flow of sentences that are connected and are integral to the surrounding ideas and writing. “It may help you to think of each sentence you write as having arms that reach backward and forward (to surrounding sentences)”. Graff and Birkenstein heavily urge the use of such techniques as “transition terms”, “pointing words”, and using similar terms and phrases throughout your writing.
Chapter 9:
In this section of the book the authors encourage writers to find, and use, their own voice in their writing. Too often, and I think this stems from more traditional use of the language, academic writing is assumed to be technical, staid, and rather boring. Graff and Birkenstein say that it is okay, within reason, to use colloquial language and relax your approach to some types of academic writing. There are exceptions, of course, but these authors feel that much writing is only made stronger by using words, terms, and phrases that may be unique to an individual’s writing style or speaking manner.
Chapter 10:
“Metacommentary”. This term refers to the art of rephrasing oneself for the benefit of strengthening his argument and/or creating more text. I call it an “art” because I feel there is a fine line between metacommentary and repetitious writing. Metacommentary is meant to be used as a technique to present similar arguments but in different words. Everyone understands things in different ways, and sometimes the difference between confusion and enlightenment on a topic is a simple rewording of the discussion. Metacommentary in your text allows for additional opportunities to clarify your stance, strengthen your argument, and display your ability to write in a convincing manner.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Dillard Discussion Questions
1. Dillard’s process to achieve her “writerly” state of mind would put me over the top. Her recipe for success would have me squirming in my seat with a whirlwind of discombobulated thought in my head. For me to write well, or for that matter do anything involving some serious thought, my most productive state requires a balance between an energized mind and a calm, relaxed, and content physical being.
If I’m too tired, or too excited, I have a hard time sitting still and being productive. If I’m too excited my thoughts will wonder and I’ll not focus very well on the task at hand. Conversely, if I’m too tired there will be an absence of creative thought. So, I may have a cup of coffee to get myself going but usually the way for me to write the best is to simply choose my timing. Like Dillard refers to, it is often a waste of time to try and force writing. If I’m not in the right frame of mind or physical position I’ll need to wait for another time. Hopefully, an impending assignment does not force me to do otherwise!
2. I do not often “knock down bearing walls” when I write. I think this is largely because I don’t have to. The vast majority of my writing, thus far, has been for school. I don’t feel, at least in the classes I take for the major I pursue, that I’m necessarily encouraged to (or rewarded for) breaking down walls. Doing the safe and familiar thing when writing for the average college class is, I think, what generally gets a student good grades. Breaking down walls and going beyond one’s comfort level in writing takes a writer into the realm of the unknown, which is something most people would consistently avoid, if possible. Therefore I think most walls are constructed by the writer, but there are rarely incentives to bust through them.
3. I enjoyed and related to her inchworm metaphor for writing. “Few sights are so absurd as that of an inchworm leading its dimwit life”. That’s funny, depressing, and quite often how I feel about my writing process, all in one! Like I say below it’s a bumbling relationship, me and writing; blindly trying to find my way through a paragraph, attempting to make some meaning of it; to bring some life to it. Metaphors are useful in this sense, but not particularly inspiring. I think I’d rather focus on things that can help me with the process and help me more proficiently achieve my goal.
4. I think the mysticism that Dillard expresses in her writing is a luxury resulting from confidence and experience of years of successful prose. Mysticism, to me, implies a “go-with-the-flow, good things will come” approach to writing. I don’t think that works for me. To get a decent sentence on a page, and to link a few together, is for me a bumbling and awkward process. I have little feel for what will make a good piece of writing, or what steps I can take to insure a likeable outcome. So… Maybe I have talked a full circle around this topic now, as what I just described does seem to imply an element of mysticism! Mysticism in the sense that, at the start of a page, I have no idea what it will take to create that page of writing. Nor, when that page is finished, do I really have any better of an understanding of what it took.
5. I noticed that Dillard’s prose is, although complex and superb, often quite light-hearted. I like that. I may be constructing this thought for my own benefit, but when I read her writing it feels as if she’s almost poking fun at the person that takes her, or anyone’s, writing too seriously. I think she maintains vagueness in her writing on writing because, like any hard-won skill, there is no blueprint for writing. As one of the best she can inspire ideas or impart wisdom, but she cannot effectively write a “how-to” manual for good writing. It is such an individual process that to try and do so would be futile. She communicates the techniques and tricks that seem to work for her; however, she stops short of telling the reader that to follow her lead will necessarily elicit great writing. Besides, to do so would be to write a text book on the topic, and how many text books are entertaining to read?
If I’m too tired, or too excited, I have a hard time sitting still and being productive. If I’m too excited my thoughts will wonder and I’ll not focus very well on the task at hand. Conversely, if I’m too tired there will be an absence of creative thought. So, I may have a cup of coffee to get myself going but usually the way for me to write the best is to simply choose my timing. Like Dillard refers to, it is often a waste of time to try and force writing. If I’m not in the right frame of mind or physical position I’ll need to wait for another time. Hopefully, an impending assignment does not force me to do otherwise!
2. I do not often “knock down bearing walls” when I write. I think this is largely because I don’t have to. The vast majority of my writing, thus far, has been for school. I don’t feel, at least in the classes I take for the major I pursue, that I’m necessarily encouraged to (or rewarded for) breaking down walls. Doing the safe and familiar thing when writing for the average college class is, I think, what generally gets a student good grades. Breaking down walls and going beyond one’s comfort level in writing takes a writer into the realm of the unknown, which is something most people would consistently avoid, if possible. Therefore I think most walls are constructed by the writer, but there are rarely incentives to bust through them.
3. I enjoyed and related to her inchworm metaphor for writing. “Few sights are so absurd as that of an inchworm leading its dimwit life”. That’s funny, depressing, and quite often how I feel about my writing process, all in one! Like I say below it’s a bumbling relationship, me and writing; blindly trying to find my way through a paragraph, attempting to make some meaning of it; to bring some life to it. Metaphors are useful in this sense, but not particularly inspiring. I think I’d rather focus on things that can help me with the process and help me more proficiently achieve my goal.
4. I think the mysticism that Dillard expresses in her writing is a luxury resulting from confidence and experience of years of successful prose. Mysticism, to me, implies a “go-with-the-flow, good things will come” approach to writing. I don’t think that works for me. To get a decent sentence on a page, and to link a few together, is for me a bumbling and awkward process. I have little feel for what will make a good piece of writing, or what steps I can take to insure a likeable outcome. So… Maybe I have talked a full circle around this topic now, as what I just described does seem to imply an element of mysticism! Mysticism in the sense that, at the start of a page, I have no idea what it will take to create that page of writing. Nor, when that page is finished, do I really have any better of an understanding of what it took.
5. I noticed that Dillard’s prose is, although complex and superb, often quite light-hearted. I like that. I may be constructing this thought for my own benefit, but when I read her writing it feels as if she’s almost poking fun at the person that takes her, or anyone’s, writing too seriously. I think she maintains vagueness in her writing on writing because, like any hard-won skill, there is no blueprint for writing. As one of the best she can inspire ideas or impart wisdom, but she cannot effectively write a “how-to” manual for good writing. It is such an individual process that to try and do so would be futile. She communicates the techniques and tricks that seem to work for her; however, she stops short of telling the reader that to follow her lead will necessarily elicit great writing. Besides, to do so would be to write a text book on the topic, and how many text books are entertaining to read?
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Commentary on Advertising Grammar
I’m no advertising exec, but it seems that most of the errors in the real-world examples must stem from the brains behind the individual marketing campaigns.
When one listens to advertising on the radio or on TV, often times the dialogue is delivered in a manner of speak that would sound pretty odd on the street. It seems like this is done in order to deliver a certain “attitude” or “feel” with the ad, as well as to place special emphasis on certain words or phrases in the ad. I assume that print advertising uses similar strategies to get their message across, and thus this might be an at least partial explanation for the grammatical errors.
The “Training Table” ad seems particularly egregious, and I can only think that the attempt here is to bundle certain aspects of the sandwich together to try and improve its assumed deliciousness. It’s notable that the only two vegetables on the sandwich, in this ad, are lumped together with other less-healthy and probably tastier, greasier, and fattier food. The lettuce hides in behind the turkey, and there are also tomatoes but they seem to be suffocating under a mass of cheese, bacon, and dressing. So, while the advertisers admit to the inclusion of these second-rate sandwich participants, they are obviously quite a bit less desirable than the main attractions. Afterall, it is the Turkey-Bacon sandwich…
The “Jack and Coke” ad followers a similar vein. Although the ad is touting the delicious mix of cola and whiskey, it does so while simultaneously, and quite clearly, pushing the whiskey product. Essentially, the ad offers the reader a great way to drink the Jack Daniel’s, but only as a means to an end. The clear intent here is to sell the whiskey, and some clever omissions of standard grammar rules do the trick quite nicely!
When one listens to advertising on the radio or on TV, often times the dialogue is delivered in a manner of speak that would sound pretty odd on the street. It seems like this is done in order to deliver a certain “attitude” or “feel” with the ad, as well as to place special emphasis on certain words or phrases in the ad. I assume that print advertising uses similar strategies to get their message across, and thus this might be an at least partial explanation for the grammatical errors.
The “Training Table” ad seems particularly egregious, and I can only think that the attempt here is to bundle certain aspects of the sandwich together to try and improve its assumed deliciousness. It’s notable that the only two vegetables on the sandwich, in this ad, are lumped together with other less-healthy and probably tastier, greasier, and fattier food. The lettuce hides in behind the turkey, and there are also tomatoes but they seem to be suffocating under a mass of cheese, bacon, and dressing. So, while the advertisers admit to the inclusion of these second-rate sandwich participants, they are obviously quite a bit less desirable than the main attractions. Afterall, it is the Turkey-Bacon sandwich…
The “Jack and Coke” ad followers a similar vein. Although the ad is touting the delicious mix of cola and whiskey, it does so while simultaneously, and quite clearly, pushing the whiskey product. Essentially, the ad offers the reader a great way to drink the Jack Daniel’s, but only as a means to an end. The clear intent here is to sell the whiskey, and some clever omissions of standard grammar rules do the trick quite nicely!
Practice Questions: Commas, Semi-colons, and Colons
1. The flooding was worst where New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania meet.
2. Because he loved to read, to write, and to edit, Mr. Diamond was considering a career in library work, marketing, or publishing.
3. Salinger’s first novel, The Catcher in the Rye, captures the language and thoughts of teenagers.
4. He has only one ambition; to produce a Broadway musical.
5. If you blow out all your candles, your wish will come true.
6. The District Managers represents four regions: Terry Smith, Rochester, NY; Chris Adler, Superior, WI; Kim Young, Chimayo, NM; and Pat Golden, Tallahassee, FL.
7. The weather report predicted high winds, freezing rain, and snow; the highway patrol advised caution when driving, yet the storm blew out to sea.
8. My boss, who wears bright colors, is a cheerful person.
9. He hires people who are energetic, efficient, and polite.
**Might these also be combined into one sentence? “My boss, who wears bright colors, is a cheerful person; he hires people who are energetic, efficient, and polite.”
10. When asked what she wanted to be later in life, she replied, “An Olympic swimmer”.
11. The governor issued this statement: “I have done nothing wrong; the IRS will find that my tax returns are all in order”.
12. Scientists spotted large numbers of dolphins, nurse and great white sharks, and blue, gray, and humpback whales near the offshore station.
13. She loves her car; a red Toyota.
14. If you drop by the doctor’s office without an appointment you can be sure of one thing; an icy reception.
15. His dog, a big Labrador retriever, is afraid of mice.
16. His recent painting, which is hanging in our local restaurant, shows dogs in various disguises.
17. His recent painting that is hanging in our local restaurant, shows dogs in various disguises.
2. Because he loved to read, to write, and to edit, Mr. Diamond was considering a career in library work, marketing, or publishing.
3. Salinger’s first novel, The Catcher in the Rye, captures the language and thoughts of teenagers.
4. He has only one ambition; to produce a Broadway musical.
5. If you blow out all your candles, your wish will come true.
6. The District Managers represents four regions: Terry Smith, Rochester, NY; Chris Adler, Superior, WI; Kim Young, Chimayo, NM; and Pat Golden, Tallahassee, FL.
7. The weather report predicted high winds, freezing rain, and snow; the highway patrol advised caution when driving, yet the storm blew out to sea.
8. My boss, who wears bright colors, is a cheerful person.
9. He hires people who are energetic, efficient, and polite.
**Might these also be combined into one sentence? “My boss, who wears bright colors, is a cheerful person; he hires people who are energetic, efficient, and polite.”
10. When asked what she wanted to be later in life, she replied, “An Olympic swimmer”.
11. The governor issued this statement: “I have done nothing wrong; the IRS will find that my tax returns are all in order”.
12. Scientists spotted large numbers of dolphins, nurse and great white sharks, and blue, gray, and humpback whales near the offshore station.
13. She loves her car; a red Toyota.
14. If you drop by the doctor’s office without an appointment you can be sure of one thing; an icy reception.
15. His dog, a big Labrador retriever, is afraid of mice.
16. His recent painting, which is hanging in our local restaurant, shows dogs in various disguises.
17. His recent painting that is hanging in our local restaurant, shows dogs in various disguises.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
