Dienstag, 29. September 2009
Donnerstag, 24. September 2009
Samstag, 19. September 2009
Stylistic devices and their functions
Stylistic Devices / Literary Terms
Alliteration (Alliteration, Stabreim)
Repetition of consonant sounds at the beginning of neighbouring words
Example: O wild west wind, …;
Full fathoms five thy father lies, ..
Effect: sound device, musical effect
Allusion (Anspielung)
A reference to a famous person or event; may be literary, historical, biblical, …
Example:
Effect: emphasis, to give credibility, to show off one´s education
Anaphora (Anapher)
The same word or expression is repeated at the beginning of 2 or more lines or sentences
Example: Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Effect: emphasis
Anticlimax
Often surprising descent from the important to the unimportant, normally in a series of statements
Example: He pawned his life, his watch and his word.
Effect: surprise, humour
Antithesis (Gegenüberstellung zweier Gedanken)
Contrasting statements are balanced against each other.
Example: To err is human, to forgive divine.
Effect: to create emphasis
Assonance (Gleichklang)
The repetition of the same or similar vowel sounds within stressed syllables or neighbouring words
Example: fate and lake
Effect: musical
Asyndeton (unverbundene Reihung von Satzgliedern)
Words are not linked by conjunctions; they are separated only by commas
Example: .. another poster, torn at one corner, flapped fitfully in the wind, … covering…
Effect: staccato-like
Chiasm (Überkreuzung)
The syntactic structure is criss-crossed; inversion in second phrase of order in first phrase
Example: to stop too fearful, and too faint to go
Effect: emphasis
Climax
Words are arranged according to the value of their importance; the most important word is the climax.
Example: We strive for the good, aim for the better, and seize the best.
Effect: to increase tension, emphasize importance
Enjambment (Zeilensprung)
A sentence runs across 2 lines
Example: I wandered lonely as a cloud
That floats on high oér vales and hills
Effect: fluent, flowing
Epipher
Repetition of one or more words at the end of two or more lines or sentences
Example: Whirl your pointed pines,
Splash your great pines
Effect: emphasis (front and end positions are always emphasized)
Euphemism (Euphemismus)
A direct, unpleasant statement is replaced by an indirect, more pleasant one to avoid bluntness.
Example: to put an animal to sleep, instead of: to kill it because it is ill
Effect: to avoid bluntness, to be polite
Hyperbole / exaggeration (Übertreibung)
Example: Sue is extremely rich. She is rolling in money.
I haven´t seen you for ages!
Effect: used for exaggeration; to attract the reader´s attention; to emphasize statements
Inversion (Umstellung von SPO)
Example: away they fly; up go the windows, out run the people, …
Effect: to emphasize or dramatize an event
Irony
A meaning is expressed that is the opposite of the intended one.
Example: the noble Brutus
Effect: ridicule; often didactic
Litotes
Understatement, often ironical, expressing an affirmative by the negative of its contrary
Example: she is not stupid (= she is quite clever)
Effect: emphasis
Metaphor
A figure of speech that implies more of a comparison than a direct impression (Without “as” or “like”!!)
Example: You are the wind beneath my wings.
Effect: emphasis; appeals to our imagination; creates a vivid picture in the reader´s mind
Metonymy
A word is substituted by another with which it is associated.
Example: crown stands for monarchy
Effect: visual effect
Onomatopoeia (Lautmalerei)
Word whose sound tries to imitate its meaning
Example: hum, buzz, crash, swish, cuckoo
Effect: sound device, creates an especially vivid impression
Oxymoron (scheinbarer Widerspruch)
Two contradictory terms are used together in a phrase.
Example: sweet death; wise fool; cruel love
Effect: provokes thoughts; emphasis
Paradox
A statement which is obviously absurd or contradictory, but has a deeper meaning
Example: The King is dead! Long live the King!
So fair and foul a day I have not seen.
Effect: thought-provoking
Parallelism
Arrangement of phrases, sentences or paragraphs, so that structure and/or meaning are similar; a form of repetition
Example: Cannon to the right of them,
Cannon to the left of them,
Cannon behind them
Volleyed and thundered.
Effect: impresses the reader
Personification (Vermenschlichung)
Attributes a human quality to animals or inanimate things
Example: Justice is blind; dancing daffodils
Effect: to emphasize similarity
Portmanteau word (Kontamination)
Two words are used to form a new one.
Example: breakfast + lunch = brunch
Pun (Wortspiel)
A humorous play on words that sound similar, but have different meanings
Example: These sausages are unidentified frying objects.
Is life worth living? That depends on the liver.
Effect: humour, fun
Repetition (Wiederholung)
Words or phrases are repeated.
Example: water, water everywhere
Effect: to emphasize; can seem monotonous
Rhetorical question
Asked for rhetorical effect, not expecting an answer
Example: A simple child, … What should it know of death?
Effect: emphasis
Rhyme
Similarity or identity of vowels (several types: end-rhyme, cross-rhyme, embracing rhyme)
Example: In the drinking-well
Which the plumber built her
Aunt Eliza fell,
We must buy a filter.
Effect: musical
Simile (Vergleich mit „like“ oder „as“)
Example: He runs like the wind.
Effect: conveys a vivid picture to the mind by linking up unrelated objects
Syllepsis (Zeugma)
One word modifies or governs others although it fits with only one.
Example: He took leave and his hat.
Effect: comical
Synaesthesia
Words describing different sensations (e.g. colour, smell, vision)
Example: murmuring light; cold colour
Effect: poetic; provokes thoughts; strikes as unusual
Synecdoche
Uses a part of something to refer to the whole
Example: He was sent behind bars (= prison)
Effect: vivid impression
Tautology (synonyme Wortwiederholung)
Superfluous repetition of words that does not clarify a statement
Example: to divide into four quarters
Effect: for emphasis
Stylistic Devices – Functions
– arouse the reader’s interest / catch the r.’s attention: titles
– make the reader think: paradox (Don’t overuse!)“
– create vivid/graphic mental images: metaphors, personifications
– emphasize certain aspects: repetition, parallelism, alliteration
– amuse/entertain the reader: euphemism, similes, metaphors
– criticize/satirize: hyperbole
– evoke (funny) associations
The British Empire
The British empire was one of the most important developments in world history. The empire was huge, it lasted a long time and it brought tremendous changes to many parts of the world. For millions of people the world today is the way it is because of the impact of the British empire.
At its height the British empire was the largest in world history. It covered around 25% of the world's land surface. Large areas of North America, Australia, Africa and Asia were all part of the British empire at one time or other. Other areas, especially in South America, were closely linked to the British empire by trade.
There is a lot of disagreement about when the empire began. Some historians say it was as early as the 12th century, when the Normans moved into Ireland. Others say the start date should be the 1490s, while other historians date the empire from the early 1600s. The end of the empire came in the years after World War 2, with most of Britain's colonies ruling themselves independently by the late 1960s.
There is no doubt that Britain was powerful. It used its wealth, its armies and its navy to defeat rival European countries and to conquer local peoples to establish its empire. However, the empire did not just rely on force. In most of the empire Britain relied heavily on local people to make it work. The empire was a very sophisticated network of nations and peoples, linked by trade, by political systems and sometimes held together by force.
The British empire brought many changes to many people and many countries. Some of these changes involved innovations in medical care, education and railways. The British empire fought to abolish slavery in the 1800s, but it profited from slavery in the 1700s. For many peoples the British empire meant loss of lands, discrimination and prejudice.
The empire changed throughout its history. In the 19th century, some parts of the empire became Dominions. These were states that were still part of the empire, but ruled themselves. In most cases this happened peacefully, although there was serious violence in Ireland.
The First and Second World Wars left Britain weakened and less interested in its empire. Also many parts of the empire contributed troops and resources to the war effort and took an increasingly independent view. This led to a steady decline of the empire after 1945. In the Asian and African colonies, nationalist movements used a range of methods to end British rule. By the late 1960s, most of Britain's territories had become independent countries.
The British empire has had a huge impact on the world. The majority of former colonies still keep their ties with Britain through the Commonwealth. Today, North America and Australia are very similar to Europe in a lot of ways. Many countries around the world now have multi-cultural populations. Parliamentary democracy, the English language and the Christian religion can be found in many countries. These are just a few of the ways in which the British empire has had a lasting effect on world history.
Sort the following statements (and the statements of the text) into a Pros and Cons table
During the 18th century, Britain became a dominant force and became the first western nation to industrialise. Trade flourished between Britain and its network of colonies. As a result, many merchants became wealthy.
Britain became the largest and most efficient carrier of slaves in the New World Military power was used to crush any internal resistance in countries like India. Self-governance was not an option.
British Imperialism has stirred up hate and resentment towards the British in some former colonies. The triangular trade supplied Atlantic colonies with labour to work on the plantations.
Rapid population growth between 1770 and 1815. Total population reached 12 million as people felt optimistic about the future. The suffering of the slaves is incalculable.
Trade and Empire gave a boost to financial services such as banks which was a considerable benefit to the British economy.
Christianisation took place in the colonies as the British suppressed other religions and religious practises Suppression of identity and culture by the British in the colonies took place.
Empire forged links between Britain and countries overseas that still exist today eg. Australia and India.
Montag, 14. September 2009
Probeklausur British traditions and values
1. Text
Antony Jay
“A ‘United’ Kingdom: The Role of the Monarchy”
Why do we need a hereditary monarch? Most states manage with an appointed or elected President, and a President could open and dissolve parliament, sign its acts, welcome visiting Heads of State and perform all the other legal and ceremonial functions fulfilled by the Queen and the members of the Royal Family.
The truth is that if that was all the monarchy was for, we would not need a Royal Family. But the British system of government is built on the recognition that a state is more than a collection of individuals, a system of laws and an area of land. It is also a focus of the emotions of a people; it expresses our sense of nationhood, and it engages our pride, our patriotism and our loyalty. When British teams do well in international championships and when British athletes win Gold Medals at the Olympics, we all walk a bit taller. And that emotional involvement in our country, that national pride, is as much a part of the totality of Britain as our legal and political system. That pride and patriotism find their expression, their focus and their symbol in the person of theQueen, just as our disagreements about how to run schools and hospitals, how much to raise in taxes and how to spend it, find their focus and expression in the conflict between the political parties in Parliament. The two together balance each other neatly: Parliament portrays public life as a battlefield, the monarchy portrays it as a family circle.
It is difficult for an elected President to represent all the nation. At times, he will be almost unknown to most of the people. At others, he will be a party politician identified with one party, and will have been regularly voted against by getting on for half the electorate. By contrast, a hereditary monarch will have been known to all the nation from birth, will be politically neutral, and will have spent all his or her life before Coronation apprenticed to the job. Certainly it is hard to think of a less democratic system than hereditary monarchy; on the other hand, the office gives very little power, though much influence and status. Democracy has to be balanced against continuity.
The British system of government recognizes that there are not one but two roles to be performed by the Head of State: one is the formal, constitutional, ceremonial role of presiding over and authorizing the activities of the government; the other is the personal, emotional role of being Head of the Nation, the focus of the people’s pride and loyalty and affection, the embodiment of their sense of nationhood. When these two roles are combined in a single institution, a single family and a single office, then people are simultaneously focusing these emotions on the constitutional state; they are confirming and supporting the legitimacy of the legal, political and economic system which regulates their daily lives.
Because of this, the monarchy is an important force for unity in Britain - perhaps the single most important force. We have been lucky enough to maintain that national unity for centuries, which makes it easy to take it for granted. But we only have to look at the former Soviet Union[…]
How long will the British monarchy last? It has been with us a thousand years, but it could be abolished tomorrow: it is Parliament, not the Queen, which is sovereign. The monarchy’s roots are not in long-gone centuries but in the hearts of the people, and in the end it is the will of the British people that will determine its fate. Perhaps it is not that undemocratic after all.
2.Assignments:
I. Comprehension
Summarize the arguments the author mentions in support of monarchy.
II. Analysis
Examine the features that characterize the text as a personal comment supporting monarchy.
III. Comment / Evaluation (you have a choice here)
a.In the last line of the text Anthony Jay concludes that “it (monarchy) is not that undemocratic at all”.
On the basis of your knowledge about the political systems of Germany and Great Britain comment on the author’s conclusion. What do you personally think about “monarchy”?
b. Write a letter to Antony Jay telling him why it is better (worse) to live in a state where monarchy has been abolished.(i.e. Germany- the president’s name is Mr Köhler)
T6 What is Britishness?
Blair will today deliver a speech on an issue that most divides the parties
Hugo Young ,The Guardian, Tuesday 28 March 2000
For Conservatives, Britishness has the delicacy of a Fabergé egg or, better, a Wedgwood figurine. It's an infinitely precious thing, of which they are the only reliable custodians. They polish it, place it behind glass, check it daily for violations. As a party, they've lived off their unique stewardship of this display-piece for many decades: the party of crown, constitution, nation and Union Jack, ranged against the party of the people, the international and the Red Flag.
Though this always was a false antithesis, these are recognisable party silhouettes. From Attlee to Thatcher, that was how things were seen to be. But the obvious cliché contained a latent paradox, which has burst unanswerably to the surface in the time of William Hague. On the one hand, he says, the British are uniquely strong, their history especially to be admired, their political system a wonder of the world, their national character proof against the alien hordes. On the other hand, apparently, their national identity is so fragile that it faces imminent destruction at the hands of foreigners and Scotsmen, abetted by Tony Blair.
Today, Mr Blair knifes this charge, in a speech that has been prepared for weeks and leaked for days. Several colleagues are billed to follow, in an important pre-election campaign that's supposed to reclaim Britishness for Labour. It's another epic moment in Labour's long march through the centre ground of politics. What's most striking about it, however, is that the message has become irrefutable. The campaign is all but redundant. Mr Hague may have lost his last issue.
The Hague view of Britishness is dominated by enemies and nostalgia. He gave a speech about it a year ago, which was incorrigibly narrow and defensive, glorying above all in the need to resist every European advance. The sacred exhibit, national identity, could never be moved. Labour's entire constitutional programme was cracking the Wedgwood. The third way was not the British way. Devolution and Lords reform were violating the very heart of Britain. The country itself, set in the silver sea, could not be relied on to survive.
Mr Hague is not alone. Vapourings about the future of Britishness have produced speeches and books on a prodigious scale in the past few years. What has mostly characterised those from the right is not inquiry but anxiety. With the absorption of Indians and the separation of Scots, is Britain not already dead? Though Hague has moved on from the ideal of ethnic homogeneity, his version of Britishness is marked with the vulgar untruth espoused by Enoch Powell and Margaret Thatcher: that "Britain" lives only by the unchanging nature of its political arrangements.
When Mr Blair came to power, he didn't have a worked-out idea about "Britain". It's been a persistent argument against his constitutional programme that there was, in fact, no programme, merely a set of ill-connected initiatives answering different political demands. But what he has done so far is the opposite of a threat to Britain.
Take devolution. Yes, the early days of the Scottish and Welsh assemblies have been difficult. They challenge the pattern of politics we have come to know as British. Sometimes they've been quite a mess. The entire political formation of all concerned, the men in Downing Street as much as those outside, has received a nasty assault which few of them were ready for. The psychology as well as the politics of centralism takes a lot of shifting.
But to talk about this as the end of Britain is the hyperbolic nonsense of desperate minds. It's merely a new, confederal kind of Britain, stumbling towards a model that arises by popular regional demand, and provides the possibility of Britain reconciling the power of global economic forces with the desire to preserve identity. Devolved institutions, when they've had time to bed down and be understood as normal, will say that Britain flourishes as a land of multiple identities. While Hagueism stands for an inward exclusiveness, Blairism feels its way to the world of porous truths.
It has more to do, if Britain is not to wither. Britain can't survive if England remains the centralised and dominant sub-state. Whether English devolution is driven through via local government or regional government will be a serious debate. But the reactionaries who would destroy Britain had better prepare for a painful discussion. Likewise, that other Hagueite icon, the House of Lords. Whatever may or may not happen to the membership of the second chamber, the notion that "Britain" can exist only if the ranks and titles of lordship are sustained for another century would be the grossest trivialising of national identity.
In a Downing Street lecture not long ago, the historian Linda Colley proposed an end to these debates about identity. They had got us nowhere, she said. Instead, she advised her audience of the great and good to address what they could do something about: citizenship. Let people stop worrying about such neuralgic questions as losing British identity or buying into European identity. All these identities could co-exist: would, indeed, be largely dependent on the image of themselves that individual citizens preferred to have. What politicians could affect was how their citizenship was made real.
Professor Colley urged that we should know, whichever patch of the islands we came from, what defines us as a citizen and what our rights are. She wasn't in favour of a republic, but suggested a monarchy that swore a solemn oath of service to the people - rather than being either bound in anachronistic pomp or reduced to riding bicycles. As well as diffusion of power from the centre, a citizen's Britain would do more to engage its ethnic minorities as well and truly British - as being, indeed, the salient proof that, unlike Englishness, Welshness or Scottishness, Britishness is a concept "with no necessary ethnic or cultural overtones".
Finally, she suggested the British should know more history. If they did so, they would discover not only that Britain had much to be proud of that did not entail the brutalities of imperialism, but that it co-existed with social and political change. When India achieved independence there were many Tories who believed that Britain, having begun to surrender its empire, had undermined its own raison d' être. It should now be clear that they misread history in the same way the terrified anti-reformers of modern Conservatism, invoking their static view of what nation means, have elicited from Mr Blair the speech he is making today.
I hope he, in his turn, is not defensive. He has plenty to do to make the political mechanics of the new devolved and European Britain work better. But the reinventions he has begun have reversed the roles history once assigned to these two parties. Now it is Conservatism for dreams, Labour for reality.
Samstag, 12. September 2009
The British Empire in colour
Freitag, 11. September 2009
How to write a comment
In a personal comment you add your own views of a problem. You do not discuss all the pros and cons of a subject, but you simply state at the very beginning what you think and to which conclusion you have come. Therefore, you normally begin with phrases like I believe that ... or In my opinion ... . Then you argue in order to defend your opinion and gain the support of your reader.
How to proceed in writing a comment
1. Read the question intensively and ask yourself whether you have understood the question (This is the normal case in examinations). Or choose a subject you are able to talk about.
2. Note down your main thoughts and collect possible facts to back your arguments.
3. The progressive paragraph is a suitable form:
• begin with a well-constructed topic sentence to whet your reader´s appetite,
• satisfy him with plenty of details and
• finish with a convincing statement referring back to the topic sentence.
4. Check whether you have been sticking to the subject.
Useful phrases:
How to begin...
I first want to make clear ....
In my opinion ...
The first point to mention ....
I object to ......
develop ....
With reference to what has been said ...
on the one hand ....., on the other hand ....
I would like to refer to further facts .....
In contrast to ....
I would like to compare this with ....
With regard to .....
to finish ...
When all´s said and done ....
In consequence of ......
I have come to the conclusion .....
In conclusion ......
I conclude ......
I am uncertain how to decide ........
Consequently .......
Read your text again and look for mistakes that normally occur in your exams.
Read your text at least twice, better three times to find all the important mistakes.
How to analyse argumentative texts
How to analyse or write argumentative texts
Argumentative texts are leading article, comments, letters to the editor, political speeches or essays. Their aim is to convince, to persuade or even manipulate the reader or listener.
An argumentative texts normally consists of 3 parts: the introduction, the development and the conclusion but the structure can vary depending on the author’s use of structural and stylistic/rhetorical devices.
Structure
| introduction · author’s opinion is given, background or purpose for writing the text is given · in speeches the speaker attracts the audience’s attention | |
| progressive structure using a clearly defined starting point, developing in a cause-to effect or problem-solution arrangement ® clarity through unity, logical coherence | antithetical structure contrasting and juxtaposing of facts, ideas and arguments ® clarity and emphasis through comparison and contrast |
| development arguments and evidence that support the author’s view are presented backed up by facts, examples or personal experience the order is from the least or less important to the more and most important arguments | development I arguments that oppose the author’s view are presented. |
| development II arguments and evidence that support the author’s view are presented backed up by facts, examples or personal experience | |
| conclusion · mostly the last paragraph: the author’s opinion is repeated, often the most important reasons that have led to the opinion are summed up. · in speeches the speaker often asks the audience to support his view or ideas and gives briefly an outlook | |
rhetorical devices
Some rhetorical devices often used in argumentative texts:
1. choice of words
The author uses/employs empathic, metaphorical, formal, colloquial or emotive language. Emotive language is often used to raise and maintain the reader/listeners attention. Strong adjectives or adverbs are used to reinforce the speakers/author’s opinion/determination.
Emphatic language is often used to reinforce the argumentation. Metaphorical language is employed to convey a vivid/lively/graphic impression/ picture and to enrich the language. It therefore conveys not only a meaning but also feelings etc. “Pictures say more than a thousand words”.
2. stylistic devices
The following devices are often used in argumentative texts:
· alliteration
· repetition
· anaphora
· metaphor
· symbol
· contrasts /antithesis
· comparison/ simile
· enumeration / listing
· exaggeration / hyperbole / understatement
· allusion
· analogy
· irony
· criticism
· The author alludes to/ suggests that
· He/she draws a comparison/ an analogy between
· He/she compares/contrasts A with B
· The speaker uses images/examples/metaphors/personification … to convey …
· He/she illustrates his/her argumentation by …
· He/she repeats … /uses repetition/ alliteration/ analogies to underline/ stress/ emphasise/ underscore that …
· He/she criticises (sth in an ironical way)/ attacks sb… . His/her criticism/ irony is directed against/ attacks …
When structuring a text do not forget to use linking words that express
· reason: therefore, that is why, because, as …
· condition: if, unless …
· concession: although, even though, despite the fact that, …
· result: consequently, thus, as a result, …
To enrich or improve your language you should use:
· gerunds / infinitive-constructions
· participle constructions
· passive