Author Topic: GIVE YOUR ENGLISH THE WINNING EDGE CHAPTER 1-3 Part 1  (Read 3763 times)

curiouscat

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 31
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
GIVE YOUR ENGLISH THE WINNING EDGE CHAPTER 1-3 Part 1
« on: May 30, 2010, 11:38:59 AM »
Hi Joe,

   i've purchased a copy of your book and so far I like how it is structured and presented. Each chapter is just enough for one to read and take in before moving on to the next. I have a few questions, for my own clarification really than anything else. Much of them if not all, are by-products of digesting some of the thoughts or word-play in the first 3 chapters of the book.

There are two parts to this. The first part has to do with your analysis of the excerpt in Chapter 1. The second part, I will include in a new post instead.

1) You mentioned that the writer used ill-chosen metaphors. Is it preferable that when writing, we must stick to one metaphor and work around that one theme? (i.e. currency for medium of exchange in finance, so all other allusions must have something to do with finance as well?)

2) How does we know if a word is already debased or over-used?

3) What do you mean by language registers?

In this statement: It is a dubious claim from both utility and semantics standpoints--that state of affairs is hardly relevant to our specific need to find out what ails our educational system."

What do you mean by utility and semantics standpoint?
What does "state of affairs" mean in this passage? My mind keeps going back to society and politics.



Joe Carillo

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4646
  • Karma: +202/-2
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: GIVE YOUR ENGLISH THE WINNING EDGE CHAPTER 1-3 Part 1
« Reply #1 on: May 30, 2010, 04:59:12 PM »
Here are my thoughts regarding your questions:

1) You mentioned that the writer used ill-chosen metaphors. Is it preferable that when writing, we must stick to one metaphor and work around that one theme? (i.e. currency for medium of exchange in finance, so all other allusions must have something to do with finance as well?)

By definition, a metaphor is “a figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally denoting one kind of object or idea is used in place of another to suggest a likeness or analogy between them” (Merriam-Webster’s 11th Collegiate Dictionary). A very basic example of a metaphor is, of course, “rising star” for “upcoming actress.”

Now, a metaphor is ill-chosen if it doesn’t really fit the context of the statement where it is used. Take a look at the statement at issue here, which I critiqued in Chapter 2 of my book Give Your English the Winning Edge: “As knowledge becomes the most important currency in the 21st century, a brief scan of the present educational scenario is imperative.”

Here, the writer uses the word “currency” as a metaphor, probably for “something in circulation that’s used as a medium of exchange.” This metaphor is obviously not true in the case of “knowledge.” Even if the possession of knowledge has become very important in the 21st century, it hasn’t reached a point yet of becoming a medium of exchange like, say, money or gold. In short, knowledge is not yet the world’s “currency” even in the figurative sense of that word, so that metaphor is indeed ill-chosen. Thus, the claim that “knowledge becomes the most important currency in the 21st century” is a slipshod, exaggerated claim that’s not reflective of the reality in our time.

Now to your next question: “Is it preferable that when writing, we must stick to one metaphor and work around that one theme?” My answer is yes; in general, we must stick to only one metaphor at a time and work around it; normally, to serve its purpose as a tool for emphasizing or dramatizing things, the next metaphor should be reserved for much later in the exposition. To use too many metaphors in a row—as what that writer had done in her essay—is a shoddy writing practice that’s known as mixing metaphors. Indeed, the general rule in writing is not to mix metaphors. We don’t say “If you can put the championship in the bag tonight, then you’d become the apple of her eyes and every stag within earshot will go gaga with envy.” A more respectable way of saying that will perhaps limit itself to only one of the metaphors and make plain talk of the rest: “If you win the championship tonight, then you’d become the apple of her eyes and every man around will envy you.”

2) How do we know if a word is already debased or over-used?

When something has become overly familiar or commonplace, it achieves cliché status. Clichés are expressions that may have been endearingly original at first, but they have been overused by so many people for so long that still using them today would be a foolhardy thing to do, as in the two clichés in this expression, “Cross my heart, I love you from the bottom of my heart.”

3) What do you mean by language registers?

A language register is any of the varieties of a language that we use to suit particular social contexts. In terms of degree of formality, they can range from very formal (very rigid, bureaucratic language), formal (ceremonious, carefully precise language), neutral (objective, indifferent, uncaring language), informal (casual or familiar language), very informal (very casual and familiar language), and intimate (personal and private language). Usually, a language register has its own unique, sometimes peculiar vocabulary and ways of saying things.

Here, for example, is a language register that’s known as academese: “In so far as manifestations of infestation by a small faunal species were evident in the residential facilities provided for the agricultural laborers, an unwillingness to occupy, utilize, or in any manner inhabit the facilities was therefore demonstrated by the aforementioned laborers.”

And here’s how that translates to a language register known as plain and simple English: “The agricultural laborers don’t want to live in their housing because it’s infested by rats.”

In this statement: "It is a dubious claim from both the utility and semantics standpoints--that state of affairs is hardly relevant to our specific need to find out what ails our educational system."

What do you mean by utility and semantics standpoint?
What does "state of affairs" mean in this passage? My mind keeps going back to society and politics.


By “utility,” I meant practical use, and by “semantics standpoint,” I meant the precise meaning the statement was meant to convey. When I said “It is a dubious claim from both utility and semantics standpoints,” therefore, I meant that the writer’s claim—that “knowledge becomes the most important currency in the 21st century”—is not only an impractical and useless statement to make but also a misleading one.

As to the phrase “state of affairs,” it is simply a more concise, forceful way—a figurative one, in fact—to say “the general state of things” or “the combination of circumstances at a given time.” Although the phrase “state of affairs” obviously had its origins from the language of statecraft, society and politics per se actually don’t figure at all in my particular usage of that phrase.

curiouscat

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 31
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: GIVE YOUR ENGLISH THE WINNING EDGE CHAPTER 1-3 Part 1
« Reply #2 on: June 01, 2010, 10:51:08 PM »
Thanks Joe for clarifying my questions. They are much clearer to me now. I didn't know there were more language registers than say, formal and informal. It also makes sense to stick to one metaphor since the magic of using metaphors is to illustrate an unfamiliar idea with knowledge that they already know, to make communication effective. Mixing metaphors would then be overkill.