Midterm Writing Assignment: 500 word essay You must begin with a thesis that maps out your argument and organize your essay into focused paragraphs:
Topic: What is Franklin’s argument in “Remarks Concerning the Savages of North America”? What examples does he provide to prove this argument?Remember to back up all of your main points with EXAMPLES from the text in quotations (” ” ) with a citation. *You can only use this textbook as reference*
The Norton Anthology of American Literature, 8th edition.
Publisher�s name: W.W. Norton
Author�s name:Nina Baym, ed.
Self Assessment Assignment
This is the Conflict Resolution Class and this class is focusing on the Peace Studies. Basically, we have one discussion and one reflection writing in each weak. We are writing the discussion and reflection base on the article we read and give our own opinion on it. Therefore, read the instruction of the assignment carefully and answer to these question to narrow form to the short essay to response for it. As well as, you can use one or two sources to get the idea as well!
Format: Minimum 1,500 words, double-spaced, 12-point TNR, 1” margins; put your name, my name, the class, assignment number, and date in the upper left corner of the first page; staple and number pages; have a title. Cite sources in MLA style.
Basic Instructions: Compose an essay comparing and contrasting the rhetorical choices of two authors in Chapter 13 of the Common Reader: “Nature and the Environment”.
Detailed Description: A2 is not a five-paragraph essay. It is also not an argument about any particular issue. It is an exercise in comparative rhetorical analysis.
Look for what you can see by reading these two essays together that you could not see by reading them separately. Don’t simply make a list of similarities and differences. THAT there are many similarities and differences between any two texts is such an obvious thing to say that it’s useless. Here, that’s not enough.
Do this instead. Look at HOW each author discusses and judges their subject. They directly say many things that are worth paying attention to. But in order to say these things (and to say them in the ways they say them), there are unstated assumptions, philosophies, worldviews, judgments, prejudices, etc. driving that person’s claims. So while two authors may seem to agree or disagree on certain things, you’ll find unexpected similarities within differences and unexpected differences within similarities if you look closely. Two authors who may argue for the same course of action may have very different reasons and logical thought processes (rationale) for making that argument. Those thought processes are what you’re comparing and contrasting here. What assumptions does each author make about their subject? What do they seem to value, and how can you tell? What (and whom) do they seem to value or de-value? What is significant and revealing about these and other rhetorical choices?
You can’t effectively or responsibly join a conversation until you’ve defined the conversation you’re trying to join. So this essay is not about taking a position on the authors’ subject. You won’t actually be writing about environmental issues in this assignment. Instead, you’ll write about HOW people like Joy Horowitz, Rachel Carson, and Bill McKibben talk about environmental issues. Their writing is the subject of your essay.
We will discuss several of these essays in class, but not all of them. Considering all the essays, you must choose at least two to work with at length. You might want to meet with me during office hours to discuss your pairing.
Write to a general academic audience, not to me. Assume your reader has not read either essay, so make sure you appropriately summarize the main claims of each piece before or as you analyze their rhetoric.
Article Review and Analysis
Article Review And Reflection: This assignment encourages you to become more familiar with one of the themes in our course by analyzing scholarly material written on a particular subject. You are required to choose an article from one of the two class readers and write an annotation of your source, stating in your own words, the author’s main thesis argument and two to three analytic points and/or evidence used to support the main argument. At the end of the summary, provide your own personal commentary on how the article has influenced your thinking on the particular topic. Be sure to reference the article using MLA style. Use as many external sources/references that you think is needed.
How to Write an Article Review: Academics read reviews of books, articles, web sites or movies to determine whether or not they should read or view the complete work. We refer to this type of writing as an annotation. An article review is an annotation or a brief description of the article. It attempts to provide enough information for the reader to know what the article is about, what the author’s main position or thesis is and what supporting evidence or arguments the author draws upon to support their position. The review also evaluates the usefulness of the work for a particular audience. In this assignment, your evaluation of the article’s usefulness will take the form of a reflection on how the article has influenced your thinking about the particular issue(s) it addresses. Your responses should reflect on the author’s analytic positions and claims, and state what you make of them in terms of your own thinking. See “How to Write an Article Review” in attachments below for further direction.
What to Include in Your Review and Reflection:
• A brief summary [Scope and main purpose of the work].
• What is the author’s main argument?
• Analysis and/or evidence that the author uses to develop his/her argument?
• What conclusions the author reaches?
• Why is this source particularly interesting? How has it influenced your thinking?
• Your annotation should be about 1000 words.
• Include the full bibliographic information for the article.
• Consult an MLA guide to complete this information.
Remember that you are reviewing someone else’s work and providing an overview of that work. As such, your writing voice should reflect this by acknowledging the author of the article throughout your review. Notice in the sample below that the reviewer refers to the author throughout her review. She also provides her reader with the bibliographic details, and states what the author’s main position is and how she goes about supporting that position at the outset of her review.
Here is a sample of a book review:
Jennifer Hargreaves, Heroines of Sport: The Politics of Difference and Identity. London and New York: Routledge, 2000, xi + 284.
“In Heroines of Sport: The Politics of Difference and Identity, Hargreaves has pushed the analysis of gender and sport in a much-needed direction…Hargreaves takes up the challenge to theorize gender and sport more adequately by examining the conditions of five groups of women from different areas of the world: South African women, Muslim women in the Middle East, Aboriginal women in Australia and Canada, and lesbians and women with disabilities in various countries. In her discussions of these groups, Hargreaves provides historical background and locates the struggle within broader structural and ideological conditions. …In making sense of these accounts, Hargreaves draws on an impressive array of theoretical work…”
Globalization in linguistics: the conflict between English and Spanish
Use headings and sub-heading to organize the research paper.
Change the title if it is not appropriate or suggest one.
1. Introduction (1 page): introduce the research topic and its relevance to globalization and insecurity. Explicitly state the research question. Clearly state the thesis. Outline the essay plan.
2. Literature review (5 pages) Define/ explain the concepts to be used in the paper. Outline the major debates in the literature on this topic and or the different approaches to studying the topic. Identify how this research paper fits into this larger debate.
3. Evidence and Analysis (8 pages): Present the case study, evidence, data that support the argument. Analyze the problem under investigation.
4. Discussion and conclusion (1 page): briefly summarize the arguments and findings. Discuss the implications of the research. Outline any questions or avenues for future research.
5. Bibliography: online sources -books, articles and journals accessible to the public.Include more than the proposed for me.
I. Research Question
Globalization has visibly changed every aspect of human life. In the case of language, there are historical notions of this phenomenon when languages in contact, another kind of conquest that caused their hybridization, death and evolution. English has positioned itself as the lingua franca throughout the years; however, its historical-social expansion is listed as an instrument of imperial control that threatens the survival and stability of localized languages in the linguistic periphery.
This proposal seeks to answer the following questions: how does the hegemony of English affect Spanish in this globalized world? Are there more negative than positive effects? Specifically, I will focus on determining the changes of hipercentralidad of this language (English) and its relation to the current expansion of Spanish.
II. Relevant literature and research contribution
The questions I asked will be answered with the views of several experts (see bibliography) in this current issue, which have discussed the effects of the globalization of English. Also, according to Harrison (2008), the alarming disappearance of languages by the threat of globalization will be discussed, especially when compares this process with the extinction of species of flora and fauna. Due to the broad spectrum of the problem, only the case of the Spanish language will be discussed, which this process has also damaged. That is, with respect to the influence of English and “The “Americanization Project” in different areas of life, such as trade, industry, international relations and particularly information technology and communication.
Moreover, it is noteworthy that Spanish has gone against the monopoly of the English language with an apologetic speech. That is Spanish language is considered the “oil”, a natural resource and a multinational company, according to the Government of Spain according to ABC newspaper (2008). The ideas presented will be supported with arguments Grijelmo (2002), who is in the defence of this language.
As for the contribution to be conducted in this research, it will be the update of this topic, find its limitations, and a critical discussion of the solutions that have been designed for the conflict between English and Spanish: a battle for linguistic territories. A potential solution to this problem is to reform the language policies of Mexico in order to defend its national language and dialects.
III. Main argument
The research starts from the idea that the monopoly of English with globalization brings more problems than benefits in the field of multilingualism, as global expansion has threatened linguistic diversity of countries with national and local “inferior” languages, defying at the same time the conditions of human development, as well as thinking and scientific research. Therefore, this fact further deepens the inequalities caused by globalization to social, political and cultural level.
The current position of English is related to the expansion of British colonialism and empires and determined by economic, political, military and cultural power of the same countries that belong to the inner circle (Kachru, 1986). Please include Bhagwati’s (2004: Culture imperilled or enriched) ideas. On the other hand, Spanish is a language that in recent years has gained importance as it is the second language in the world by number of native speakers, the second in international communication and the third most used language on the Internet, according to the Institute Cervantes (2012). These figures provide a favourable outlook for the Spanish and stop the expansion of English, since it is necessary the recognition of other languages and dialects to pacify the effects of globalization.
In regards to the conflict between English and Spanish, this research also discusses the phenomenon of anglozination of the Spanish users with the influence of the media and the hispanization in the US (Preiswerk 2011): the United States will become in 2050 the first Spanish-speaking country (Instituto Cervantes, ibid.). From the above problems, this research will propose the review of sociolinguistic policies and programs that allow the the inclusion, not the monopoly, of other languages.
This research will use a comparative approach between the world position of both languages, especially to bring out the advantages and disadvantages of globalization of English in general in regards to Spanish. At the same time, the expansion of the Spanish language will be discussed and the constant struggle to fit it as a lingua franca. The data will be more qualitative (theoretical) than quantitative, although the above statistics illustrate the main problem of this paper and straighten the arguments, such as, in addition to those presented above, the rate of disappearance of languages, the ranking of languages spoken and learned globally, the advancement of Spanish, etc. Please include a case study where the English expansion in affecting Spanish, i.e. Spanglish in Mexico-USA, the disappearance of dialects in Mexico due to the globalization process and English, and also talk about the importance that Spanish is gaining in the world.
References (you can add more references in English)
Bhagwati, J. (2004). In Defense of Globalization. Oxfor University Press.
Díaz-Polanco, H. (2000). “El conflicto cultural en el umbral del tercer milenio”, Memoria, 131, 34-42.
García Canclini, N. (2002). La globalización imaginada. México, Buenos Aires, Barcelona: Paidós.
Grijelmo, A. (2002). Defensa apasionada del idioma español. México, D.F.: Santillana Ediciones Generales.
Grin, F. (2003). “Language planning and economics,”Current issues in language planning, 4, 1, 1-66.
Hamel, R.E. (2008). “La globalización de las lenguas en el siglo XXI. Entre la hegemonía del inglés y la diversidad lingüística”, en Política lingüística na América Latina. Dermeval da Hora e Rubens Marques de Lucena (orgs). 45-77. Joao Pessoa: Idéia/Editora Universitária.
Harrison, K.D. (2008). When a language die: the extinction of the world’s languages and the erosion of human knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Instituto Cervantes.(2012). El español: una lengua viva. Informe 2012 [en línea] [fecha de consulta: 01.10.2014]. Disponible en:
Kachru, Braj. (1986). The alchemy of English. The spread, functions and models of non-native Englishes. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
López García, A. (2007). El boom de la lengua española. Análisis expansivo. Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva.
Lozano, I. (2005). Lenguas en guerra. Madrid: Ediciones Espasa Hoy.
Mackey, W. F. (2003). “Forecasting the fate of languages,” Languages in a globalising world. Maurais, Jacques & Morris, Michael A (eds). 64-81. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pérez, M. J. (2008). “El español, una multinacional del idioma aún en expansión”, en ABC [en línea] [fecha de consulta: 28.09.2014]. Disponible en: Presiwerk, M. (2005). Contrato Intercultural. Crisis y refundación de la Educación Teológica. La Paz, Quito: Plural editores.
This task is designed to help students further explore key issues affecting ethics in business and their learning about of it. In addition, students will need to record activities and evidence in relation to graduate capabilities. You will utilise evidence, your responses to the week 1 in-class activity about EBL and the unit content, your group written report peer / self review from week 9 (compared to group presentations experience) and reflections throughout the semester to develop an extended learning reflection responding to set questions.
Students are encouraged to use their VU Collaborate personal journal for their own private purposes over the semester to reflect, blog, and to record evidence of skills development and other activities to support your own learning development.
Questions will cover how you utilised the Enquiry Based Learning method, improved graduate capabilities, developed an understanding of ethical theories and moral argument and your ability to apply them in a business setting.
Make a list of all the words that you can think of that English has borrowed from other languages, and name the language they come from. Pick for example, common words like, rice, guarantee, and wiener. etc.
In an short essay (at least 250 words, not too much more than 500, please J) first give a clear and comprehensive account of what Brooks understands to be the formal unity of a work.
Second, itemize all those elements that he downplays/deemphasizes and/or rejects….on account of their allegedly not being essential to the meaning of a work of literature, i.e. all those that don’t immediately pertain to its formal unity. Please be cautious in your reading, e.g. just because Brooks acknowledges the existence or essentiality of something does not mean that he thinks it is fundamental to the consideration of the formalist critic.
Third, reflect on which downplayed element (s) (religion, biography, historical context, subjective process, etc. ) that you think Brooks may have neglected most. If possible give a contemporary reference and/or draw the comparison to Aristotle.
(The Wikipedia article on Brooks may be helpful to you. And one heads up: Lionel Trilling, who is mentioned, is another literary critic of the first half of the twentieth century who is close to Brooks intellectually in significant ways, with the exception of his interest in psychoanalysis and historical consciousness [Freud and Spengler]).
Please cite the text and edit your work as you will be graded for both FORM and CONTENT. Be sure your upload to turnitin.com includes your name.
This quiz is worth 100 points, but outstanding work will earn extra-credit!
Beowulf and Cuchulain from cuchulainn’s Boyhood Deeds
The characters Beowulf and Cuchulainn uchulainn’s Boyhood Deeds dramatize various characteristics of heroism. Although one work is an Anglo-Saxon epic, while the other arises from the mists of Celtic legend, the two heroes embody similar traits which comprise the Anglo-Saxon and the Celtic heroic ideals. Therefore, in a well-written, well-developed two to three page paper, please compare the two heroes, selecting three aspects which the two share.
In your introductory paragraph, remember to introduce your reader to your topic, each sentence becoming more and more narrow and specific to arrive at the thesis sentence, the last sentence of the introductory paragraph. Then fully develop with adequate supporting quotes each point go the thesis in each subsequent paragraph.