Comparative HL - ZitsGender comic strip and Why Men Don't Listen and Women Can't Read Maps excerpt

Text A: http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/myl/llog/ZitsGender.gif
Text B:http://khalidrafiq.weebly.com/uploads/2/6/0/3/2603611/why_men_dont_listen_and_
women_cant_read_maps.pdf (Chapter 1 Same Species, Different Worlds, "Some things are obvious" (Page 19))

The two texts being compared are a comic strip from Language Log and an excerpt from a book titled Why Men Don't Listen and Women Can't Read Maps. Both the texts are about how men do not pay attention to minor details whereas women do. However, the second text is also about how women fail to see the big things which is something not evident in the first one. The purpose of Text A is to criticize men for being so unobservant of things that are important to girls. This is conveyed through a comic strip that is condescending towards men. In contrast, the purpose of Text B criticizes both for their individual negligence of certain aspects through paragraphs as a chapter would be like.

The first text comes from a Language Log from upenn.edu targeted towards its students and faculty and those who can access it online. The second text is an except from a book Why Men Don't Listen and Women Can't Read Maps which is written by Allan and Barbara Pease and published in 2001. The specific section I chose as a text is titled, "Some things are obvious" from Chapter 1. This book is targeted towards readers online and those who have it on paperback that only see things one way, blaming men for what they avoid saying or women. The chapter offers a different approach where it shows both sides; women criticizing men and vice versa for things they fail to notice and understand.

The first text features two characters, a man and a woman, where the woman is accusing the man of being "clueless" and not "acutely aware of his surroundings." She asks him a series of questions in the four panels, with her hands over his eyes such as what she's wearing and what he is wearing, to which he only responds with "uh.." and "um"s implying that he does not observe or pay attention to such things. The second text just had various scenarios where a man and woman would argue about trivial topics such as men would criticize women for not being able to see a red flashing light but be able to spot a sock from 50 meters away. The author demonstrates that it depends on their interest. Women prefer being organized and are observant of little things and not of the things that men find essential such as reading maps and seeing red danger lights. "Men think they're the most sensible sex. Women know they are," shows that in all circumstances they each accuse each other of not being "sensible" enough and disregarding these things.

In terms of literary techniques, the first text is humorous. The comic strip mocks women because it demonstrates how high-strung they are and care about things that are trivial to men. It gets downright ridiculous when the woman demands, "Okay, tell me who you're talking to" because that is the extent to which the thinks he is clueless. She also interrupts him just as he begins speaking with "um" to which she brings up another question. The other text is a little more realistic of scenarios where this actually happens and women are not acutely aware of directions or men with where their clothing is. The examples are still amusing such as men can never find their socks but their CDs are in alphabetical order, or that women talk too much without ever getting to the point. Overall, both with their respective humour convey the purpose that women may accuse men of being unobservant, and in the second text the additional purpose is that this could also apply conversely, and both genders tend to think the other is careless in things they rate as important.

Analysis - Teen slang: What's, like, so wrong with like?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-11426737

"Teen Slang - What's, like, so wrong with like?" is a magazine article by Denise Winterman published in the BBC News Magazine. Winterman opens the article with stating that Emma Thompson, an Oscar-winning actress gets aggravated when teenagers use the word 'like' and thinks it makes them sound stupid to the extent where she feels she's going "insane" (Winterman1). However, Winterman's argument is that the word 'like' is actually useful in our daily use of language and not as big of a "crime" as Thompson seems to think it is (Winterman 1). Linguists find that the reason we use the word 'like' so much is because humans have adapted to try and make their language flow as much as possible. We use fillers such as "like" to pause and think because as non-linguists we are not as capable in terms of lexicon and grammar and especially as teenagers, we need to stop and think.
For teenagers, the word "like" has become very versatile. As a conversation filler first, it is also used as a quotative "And I was like, and she was like to him..."and to indicate a metaphor, "He like got burned when she was like..." Winterman states that the origin of "like" is from America and particularly The Valley Girl slang but has spread to the UK through means of media such as American films and television. Winterman lastly argues that "like" is a way to identify with one another for teenagers. They feel as if they belong when others speak like them and it's a form of comfort zone that differentiates them from adults. The linguist then says that in their profession, they also have acronyms that make them a community so why shouldn't teenagers outside their school life? 
Winterman as a language expert maintains a formal register throughout the article but does get her voice across. She attempts to relate to teenagers by using quotes from language experts that contain the person pronoun "we" quite frequently such as"we all stall for time and historically always have" to demonstrate that it is human beings as a whole that do this, and it is not unusual for teenagers to pause for time by adding a filler. Similar to this one, Winterman has included other quotations from language experts that do not oppose the use of "like" and using these references help to strengthen her argument that it is indeed nothing to get so angry about as the actress does. She uses some figurative language that makes her article interesting to read. An instance where she does this when she states that the actress was getting "hot under the collar" or essentially, very irritated. She has also used a metaphor to display the use of "like" as an indication of a metaphor such as "I, like, died of embarrassment when you told me to stop using slang."
This article from BBC News is helpful in conveying her argument. As it is a trusted source and there are various references to linguists such as Dr. Groves and Professor Upton, it makes her point strong.

Gender roles in Archie and Friends [Written task Prep]

Growing up, I would love reading comics lying around the house. One of the series I enjoyed most was Archie which is an American publication from the 1940's and its various spin offs such as Betty and Veronica and Jughead. I enjoyed the humorous characters present in the comics and looking back on it, I decided to reflect on some of the gender roles portrayed by them throughout. 

Firstly the primary character is of course, Archie Andrews. He is a redheaded, freckly, lanky boy who manages to attract a variety of girls throughout the series despite the fact that he is not the bold, strong man that girls would stereotypically like. What is more is that he plays Rugby even with his less than fibrous physique and has a huge interest in cars that he cannot afford. His constant rival is Reggie Mantle; the boy who supposedly has got everything: athletic abilities, wealth and striking good looks. Reggie embodies the title of the perfect man and competes to win the affections of Veronica Lodge against Archie. There is always a sense of competition between the two but despite the fact that Reggie "has it all", he often loses to Archie when it comes to girls. This provides a different emerging insight regarding males that their physical attributes are not as important as their personality because while Archie is affectionate and sensitive, Reggie is arrogant and impervious automatically making Archie more favourable.

The two other main characters are Betty Cooper and Veronica Lodge. Betty is the everyday girl who is willing to help whenever needed making Archie take her for granted as a result of that. This demonstrates that when a girl is too nice, men realize they will always have her around. She does all her work by herself and does not rely on anyone, however there is a dependency indicated by her struggle to find a boy and to impress Archie Andrews hence she is willing to do anything for him. In contrast, Veronica Lodge is the pampered, rich and beautiful girl who feels she can get anything she wants with money. She relies on her father Mr. Lodge to buy her everything she desires. She does not take responsibility and has hired people to do all her work for her unlike Betty Cooper. Veronica also strives to retain Archie's interest in her. As she is not very kind like Betty and has an unattainable aura about her, Archie clings on trying to "win" her. However her violent personality and desire to always be correct repels Archie frequently making him turn to Betty. Despite the girls' differing personalities, they develop a strong bond with each other and if it happens that Archie likes someone other than the both of them, they mutually gang up against her.The girls are also there for each other and act together as if they don't need a man, demonstrating a sort of feminism. In spite of that, they do contradict it when both of them are after Archie Andrews and have different schemes throughout the series to pursue him. Betty Cooper has a very polite tone to complement her personality whereas Veronica's language demonstrates vanity and complacence. 

Another big character in the series is Jughead Jones. Although he is a male character, he has anti-masculine interests that men are not commonly associated with in society. For instance, he loves reading a bit too much, women don't draw his attention and he does not like sports unlike the other males in the series. Despite this, he is popular among both boys and girls. With his witty sense of humour, Jughead often outsmarts Reggie Mantle, the perfect boy.The writers may have used the character Jughead to open up the eyes of people in the 40's and to show that it is completely okay for men to not be restrained by typical male interests.

Analysis - "The Talk of the Sandbox; How Johnny and Suzy's Playground Chatter Prepares Them for Life at the Office"

http://www.georgetown.edu/faculty/tannend/sandbox.htm

The Talk of the Sandbox; How Johnny and Suzy's Playground Chatter Prepares Them for Life at the Office
Deborah Tannen

"The Talk of the Sandbox; How Johnny and Suzy's Playground Chatter Prepares Them for Life at the Office" is written by Deborah Tannen and was published in The Washington Post on December 11, 1994. This online newspaper article is essentially about how the behaviour of girls and boys is very divergent in spite of being in the same situation. Tannen demonstrates this by using several real-life scenarios where the conduct of males and females differs in the way that they handle issues.
Right off the bat, the author introduces Bob Hoover who had observed the behaviour of boys and girls whilst playing softball (pun unintended ;)) He noticed that girls do not like to lead or make themselves come across as superior whereas boys do and that is how male star athletes are treated with the respect they feel they "deserve." Girls do not like to take all the credit by doing everything by themselves and instead give other teammates a chance while if a boy is a good athlete he is almost expected to perform outstandingly. Boys are worried about their image and how they will look, while girls play for the team and do not care as much about how they will appear individually. Additionally girls are very apologetic if they make a mistake even when they are not actually sorry while on the other hand boys do not apologize even when they do feel remorse for letting their team down. Tannen then takes Hoover's observations and compares them to her similar examination of men and women at work. Much like the athletes, women at work do not want to seem authoritative and address their juniors as their equals while men in authority at work press their importance upon others and do not feel the need to be overly polite because after all, they are in charge. In the office as well, men will not agree to their own mistakes and evade the blame to appear unflawed while women will apologize for no cause at all and ask countless questions regardless of how that would make them seem. 
The next set of comparisons made by Tannen include a linguist Amy Sheldon's observations of pre school kids and the way they sort their matters. The boys battle it out by getting straight to it, declaring that the particular toy is their possession respectively and ultimately using physical power to get what they want. On the other hand are two girls who are having a complex debate over sharing toy medical instruments. They are trying to balance between being polite and taking the others needs into account, but holding their own as more important. This discussion ends with one girl uninviting the other to her birthday to which the response is that she did not want to attend anyway. This situation is then paralleled with another work scenario where a woman Maureen is using her negotiation technique much like the preschool girl against a man Harold who is simply going for what he wants like the preschool boys. Maureen, expecting him to negotiate as well, is taken aback when Harold simply states that it's his way or the high way. Specifically he says that he would quit the job if the candidate he preferred was not elected. Thus, Maureen is lead to agree with him instead of countering him by saying she would do the same. 
Lastly, the author is sure to include that there is no definite behaviour of all men or women or all boys and girls but gender does have a significant impact on the way they conduct themselves as depicted in the examples. Men like to show who's boss and they don't think it's necessary to apologize for every little thing and are ultimately very straight to the point. On the contrary, women like to treat others as their equal and apologize not just when they are at fault but also to indicate that it is okay or that they are sorry the circumstance took place, and they like to consider others needs as well as their own. They would much rather negotiate than be straight forward about it. Tannen states that the study of conversation can help choose different approaches to get what you want just like how Maureen could have gone the other way about it and not given up so easily. 
By using varied examples from sources such as Bob Hoover from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and Amy Sheldon, a linguist from the University of Minnesota strengthens what Tannen is conveying in her article and correspond well to her own observations as well. As a linguistics Professor at Georgetown University, her tone is that of an expert with occasional humour for instance, referring to the disinvite to the birthday party as "the ultimate sanction" (Tanner1). As the article is published in The Washington Post, it is sure to reach a wide audience and its publication on the Georgetown website as well will stretch out to faculty and students alike. The news article is informative and tells the reader that beside so many factors such as ethnicities and family backgrounds, gender is a huge role player in determining how humans acquit themselves.

Comparative HL - ISOI Academic Policy and Calvin and Hobbes comic

Comparison HL

The two texts being compared in this entry are ones that we received in class; an ISOI school policy and a comic strip from Calvin and Hobbes. The greatest similarity between them is that they have the same message to convey which pertains to academic dishonesty but the texts are entirely different otherwise. 

The first text, a school policy, is issued by the International School of Islamabad whereas the comic strip is from a popular series of comics known as Calvin and Hobbes. Their sources essentially tell the reader what audience they are targeted towards. The school policy is certainly directed towards students of the school whereas the comic strip is directed towards readers of that particular newspaper/magazine. Contrary to what one would normally assume about a comic strip, it’s subjected towards people of all ages, and in this particular case, adults seem like a more appropriate audience. 

Although they essentially have the same aim, to deter kids from being academically dishonest, it is slightly different because the policy is extremely direct and states specific kinds of academic dishonesty prevalent in the IB program, with consequences shown if academic infringement or malpractice were to occur. On the other hand, the comic strip is more oblique and weighs the pros and cons of cheating. There is use of visuals to demonstrate the psychological aspect of what goes through a child’s mind before cheating, and conclusively how unethical it is. As the school policy is affiliated officially with the school, the audience is easily determined as being the students of the IB program. However, the Calvin and Hobbes comic, despite the subject being academic dishonesty, does not only apply to students. It appears to be targeted towards adults because of the complexity of language used that adults would only be able to comprehend. This comic goes beyond just academic dishonesty by stating things such as, “In the real world, people care about success. Not principles. ...Then again maybe that’s why the world is in such a mess.” This statement by Calvin explains the current state of the world, that it is deceitful and immoral, a theme adults should be aware of. Furthermore when Hobbes says, “Anymore, simply acknowledging the issue is a moral victory” is also in reference to the world’s current state. It implies that people today are so depraved that merely being conflicted between doing what is wrong or right is a “moral victory” in itself. The sophisticated irony used by this character is again, something that a younger audience would not recognize immediately.

The pieces are two completely different text types. The ISOI Academic Honesty Policy is in the layout of a formal outline. The diverging sub-categories are lettered and the pertaining content is further divided into paragraphs. On the other hand, the Calvin and Hobbes text is in the form of a comic trip with two characters and their dialogue communicated in speech bubbles. The structure is effective for each to get their message across such as The ISOI Academic Honesty Policy asserts that plagiarism is prohibited in the school and the implications of it by using a concrete policy. Due to the straightforwardness of the information presented, the strict condemnation of plagiarism and the consequences of the students’ actions shown, the policy is potent in getting the message across. Similarly, although the comic strip has visuals of two characters, speech bubbles and the writing is much less formal, the depiction of the personality of an individual who is pondering about whether to cheat or not, and it’s moral implications also delivers the message that the comic is trying to convey. 

In terms of the writer’s literary techniques, the ISOI Academic Honesty Policy does not possess anything particularly distinct from a regular policy. The comic strip however, contains juxtaposition where Calvin puts cheating and not cheating side by side and weighs what would be be a better option, and also sarcasm/irony when Hobbes states that acknowledging the problem was a moral victory. The comic is also humorous as it has a punchline at the end where Calvin states, “Well, it just seemed wrong to cheat on an Ethics test.” This reveals to the audience that this boy had good morals from the start, therefore it should not have been as difficult for him to take the test had it not been for his internal conflict about academic dishonesty. 

Although these two texts seem entirely different because of their structure, they are similar because of the message they are conveying which is to dissuade individuals from committing academic dishonesty. More narrowly, the ISOI Academic Policy focuses on preventing students against plagiarism whereas the Calvin and Hobbes comic is on a larger scale and delivers that deceit is unethical with academic dishonesty as their case in point. Both the texts are effective in conveying the essence but with different means.

Analysis - Does Your Language Shape How You Think?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/magazine/29language-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Does Your Language Shape How You Think?

Guy Deutscher

This text titled Does Your Language Shape How You Think? by Guy Deutscher was published in The New York Times online on August 26th 2010. This online newspaper article is about how language impacts the way an individual’s mind functions. First of all, Deutscher takes a claim made by Benjamin Lee Whorf, a chemical engineer, who essentially stated that our native language constrains our mind  and we are unable to grasp concepts that are not given words to, in our language. He said that when a language does not have a particular word for a concept, the concept itself cannot be understood by the speaker. Deutscher argues that Whorf did not have any evidence to substantiate this theory and that his claim is wrong on so many levels. He gives an example that although there isn’t an English word for Schadenfreude in German, it does not mean that an English speaker is unable to comprehend the concept of pleasure in someone else’s misery. 

After stating that Whorf’s claim was not supported and incorrect, Deutscher forms his own theory which is that languages do influence the mind, “not because of what our language allows us to think but rather because of what it habitually obliges us to think about” (Deutscher1). In the rest of the paper, he basically substantiates why he believes that our languages do not force or constrain us to think a certain way, rather, they influence to us to think about certain concepts that have been instilled in our minds. Examples that he has used are that in English while in conversation we are not obliged to indicate what sex we are referring to while simply stating, “I spent yesterday evening with my neighbor” (Deutscher2) whereas in German or French we are forced to give it away because of the gender of each noun. In German, French, and other languages, even objects are given genders to, and that influences their mind to associate the random object with that particular gender. For instance, la fourchette, or the fork, will always be female to the French and it becomes a subconscious habit. However, it is not as if they are forced to believe that the inanimate objects have a determined sex, it is simply what they are associated as because their mind has been influenced to, as a result of their mother tongue. 

Another aspect that plays a great role in Deutscher’s argument is the language of space. Most countries would describe directions with terms we are familiar with using everyday such as “left,” “right,” “behind,” “ahead” but in some parts of the world such as remote Aboriginal Australia or Bali, they use cardinal directions on an everyday basis, so everything we describe with terms like left, right, they substitute with east and west. They know their directions everywhere because they are accustomed to using geography to assess where north is where ever they are. “They couldn’t explain it any more than you can explain how you know where behind is” (Deutscher 3) indicating that it comes naturally due to their brought up in the language. 

There are various other aspects where language comes into play such as colours where two different colours in English would be shades of the same colour in another; there are also certain languages where what you say has to be completely empirical or otherwise stated, so one would have to say whether they directly saw an animal or saw footprints of an animal, simply to indicate that “an animal passed here” (Deutscher 4).  Deutscher concludes his article by saying that our native language does affect our logical, intuitional and emotional outlook on the world but it does not mean that it limits how much we can learn, or alter our comprehension of concepts that are not familiar in our language. 

The writer has provided many examples to substantiate his argument and has used a great deal of references to do so. One of these references is to Mark Twain who has a popular rant known as "The Awful German Language" where his frustrations are portrayed as a result of the gender complexity of objects and alluding to it as being "perverse" (Deutscher3). Another regard is made to the Aboriginal speaker Guugu Yimithir. Such referrals make his argument stronger and seem more authoritative. Additionally, Deutscher's voice is communicated through his language. He stays formal throughout but has used some humorous examples to keep the article entertaining and convey his voice. One of these examples is where he asks a Matses man about how many wives he has. Moreover, in terms of literary devices, there is one identified metaphor where he states that "our mother tongue was claimed to be a "prison house"" indicating that it was said to have restrict people from learning foreign concepts. Overall, this is an effective text type to deliver his argument and because this is published in the NYTimes, the audience being a wide range of people of all ages, it will be well received and understood. 

Opinion Column

Opinion Column 

The merging of different language in today’s culture is one of the most fascinating components of our global community. Every day I find myself speaking a mix of English and Urdu to communicate my thoughts and I believe it works very effectively. The reason why is because there are so many words in Urdu that we have grown up knowing that cannot possibly be said in English without saying a sentence to explain. This mix has made it easier for people that are not proficient in English or Urdu, to form a blend to use at their convenience.

Similarly this happens in many areas of the world. While learning French and German, I discovered that so many English words have been derived from these languages, or they share common Latin roots. Easily recognizable words like, “exactement” for “exactly” in French and “gut” for “good”  in German make it easier for us to comprehend certain words that can help decipher overall content. I have overheard conversations of the German students in our school who pitch in certain words in English for words that cannot be substituted, or vice versa.

Communication in a combination of more than one language with each other has made it easier for our cultures to diffuse. There is are components of English used throughout the world that are demonstrated in an article "A Language Without Limits" by Deena Kamel. It demonstrates that in different parts of the world, there are existing communities of different nations. A specific example is an Iraqi telecommunications sales representative in Scarborough who thinks in Arabic but speaks in English. Like the author Kamel presents that switching between two languages is creative and not incompetent, I find that it is also an inventive way to connect and convey ideas.

Written Commentary - "English grows into strange shapes when transplanted into foreign soil"

Written Commentary

“English grows into strange shapes when transplanted into foreign soil”

Ben Macintyre

English grows into strange shapes when transplanted into foreign soil by Ben Macintyre is an opinion column about the official language English that has been altered and transformed after being “planted” or embedded internationally.  He introduces the newly formulated versions of English such as Spanglish, Hinglish, and Chinglish that have caused a phenomenon in their nations. He uses the statistic that in the 60's there were about 250 million English speakers in the US, UK and its colonies, but now there are about 250 million Chinglish speakers in China alone. This demonstrates the widespread of the English language. The author however still argues that even though English is continuing to spread throughout the world and there are multitudes of dialects and variations, they are still all just descendants, or offspring, of the language in it's original form and the that form continues to live as the supreme. This is illustrated in an example where he says that Shakespeare is the CEO of the English language with all of these different shareholders (Hinglish, Chinglish). 
This piece is in the perspective of the author and his opinions but it contains quotations and arguments from people such as a Cambridge University professor to further strengthen his point and the tone of the piece is informative.
The opinion column serves well for his topic but it is not the most effective. He doesn't have many opinions and the column is mainly facts and examples of English used in different cultures. This could very well have been done in the form of a magazine or newspaper article without him saying, "I love the strange shapes into which English grows when transplanted into foreign soil..." (Macintyre1). Although it portrays his agreement to everything else he is saying through facts and examples, his opinions are not particularly enlightening.

Written Commentary - "Becoming Bi-Cultural Makes You More Creative"

In class, we received a piece titled "Becoming Bi-Cultural Makes You More Creative" written by Art Markman. It was published in an online magazine Psychology Today on August 31st 2012. The purpose of this article is for the writer to communicate that individuals who have resided in more than one country tend to be more inventive as opposed to those who have lived in the same country their entire life. Although it is not particularly an opinion column because the author does not directly state his own perspective, the examples and studies shown indicate that he believes being bi-cultural has a good impact on an individual's creativity. The theme of this piece is basically the value of having been exposed to more than one culture as Markman puts it. The targeted audience of this online article is the readers of Psychology Today which tells us that the author intends to correlate being bi-cultural and creativity in terms of how the mind develops through knowledge of different cultures.

The structure of the online article is similar to that of an ordinary written piece. There are no special techniques in this and the article is simply divided into paragraphs of varying lengths. The author's aim is to inform what studies have shown, and argue using that evidence but without his personal subjectivity. However, it can be understood where his opinion is revealed when he first talks about researchers suggestions that when people are bi-cultural it helps them to see other views on an issue and that integrative complexity lets them be more creative, but then he reiterates it by saying, "after all, being creative often involves seeing things in more than one way" which by the transitive property shows his stance on the subject and his agreement with the research. Another aim of the author is to express that creativity is what makes a business successful and concludes by saying that businesses would flourish if they hired employees that have lived in more than one culture.

The tone of this piece is neutral throughout and there is no word choice that particularly stands out as a strength in this article other than integrative complexity which is also italicized to display the complex composition of their brains after being integrated in more than one culture.