The main problem for me with academic writing, as opposed to texting is it's inherent formal nature. My normal speech (and therefore, my normal writing voice) is peppered with slang phrases, uncouth words, and improper grammar that make swapping to the world of academia a challenge.
I can't say "LOL" or use emoticons in a paper. I can't swear, or use the habitual be. "Cookie monster be eating cookies" would earn me a subpar grade in a classroom setting, even though linguistic scholars point out that it isn't a misuse of the word.
A professor or teacher is looking to see that my ability to communicate formally is coherent in academic writing. I am being judged on not just what I say, but how I say it.
Informal writing is about communication, not judgment.
Thursday, June 29, 2017
Sunday, June 25, 2017
Post 7
Texting different people is a difference in linguistics. With my parents, I use formal grammar, capital letters, clear punctuation. This is because the method of reading that they grew up with is letter writing and emails, which are both formal.
With my peers, however, linguistics change, because we grew up on the internet, where speed of communication and emotional clarity took precidence over intellectual clarity, and as such, abbreviations, smiley faces, and almost dadaist quips are the normal modality. If I were to send the message "I aM so MaD?" to my mother, she'd probably be confused. Why am I asking a question about my own emotional state? Why are my letters capitalized so randomly? Most people my age, however, recognize that I am not asking a question, i am expressing surprise, and incredulity. The subtext is "I can't BELIEVE this".
This is somewhat distinct from academic writing, where, regardless of whether my audience is my instructor or a group of my peers, my main goal is clarity of thought. Therefore, I must use fully formed sentences, clearly demarkated by paragraphs when I finish a specific point. I must summon the full might of my SAT vocabulary so that I sound academic and don't inadvertently add "Lol" to my paper.
Saturday, June 24, 2017
Post 6:
"They say that music with guitars is going out of style" sings British Singer-songwriter-punk Frank Turner in his song "Four Simple Word"
This may not be entirely accurate, rock stations still play new songs by rising bands, and many feature guitars. The point of the phrase, and one that comes up often in his songs, is that music as a craft, as a way of connecting listeners to the music emotionally, and creating a sense of shared experience, is on its way out. Frank Turner calls his brand of music "campfire punk rock" because, in his view, the music scene has become about profiting off art and putting artists on pedestals. He wants to change that, to hold on to the concept of music performance as being about creating a community.
His shows capture this, he talks to the audience the way a person might around a fire, or around a coffee table in someone's living room. It's a hard thing to describe, but for around 4 hours, once a year or so when he makes his way to the Atlanta area, I have 300 friends I've never met before. We line up for hours before his shows waiting for the doors to open, we trade jokes and take pictures and when Frank steps onto the stage, there's something almost spiritual about the sensation.
There are songs about love, of course, but there are more about other things. About the feeling of nostalgia when you're in your hometown, or losing an old friend to sickness, or of being angry with politics, or even just the feeling of listening to a Bruce Springsteen song.
His latest record, "Positive Songs for Negative People" could be his job description.
I don't know when his next show is, but I know one thing for sure,
I'm buying a ticket.
This may not be entirely accurate, rock stations still play new songs by rising bands, and many feature guitars. The point of the phrase, and one that comes up often in his songs, is that music as a craft, as a way of connecting listeners to the music emotionally, and creating a sense of shared experience, is on its way out. Frank Turner calls his brand of music "campfire punk rock" because, in his view, the music scene has become about profiting off art and putting artists on pedestals. He wants to change that, to hold on to the concept of music performance as being about creating a community.
His shows capture this, he talks to the audience the way a person might around a fire, or around a coffee table in someone's living room. It's a hard thing to describe, but for around 4 hours, once a year or so when he makes his way to the Atlanta area, I have 300 friends I've never met before. We line up for hours before his shows waiting for the doors to open, we trade jokes and take pictures and when Frank steps onto the stage, there's something almost spiritual about the sensation.
There are songs about love, of course, but there are more about other things. About the feeling of nostalgia when you're in your hometown, or losing an old friend to sickness, or of being angry with politics, or even just the feeling of listening to a Bruce Springsteen song.
His latest record, "Positive Songs for Negative People" could be his job description.
I don't know when his next show is, but I know one thing for sure,
I'm buying a ticket.
Monday, June 19, 2017
Post 5
A public issue that concerns me? Just one? I have a veritable LAUNDRY LIST of public issues that concern me. Racism in policing, politicians who vote against the needs of their constituents, explosions in London, poisoned water in Michigan. But let's talk about one that's maybe overlooked in the wider context of our culture: Voter Disenfranchising.
It's been "technically" illegal to discriminate voters based on race or nationality since 1870. EIGHTEEN SEVENTY. It's been ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY-SEVEN YEARS since the United States made illegal to discriminate at the voting booth. I say "Technically" because at almost no time since then has it been enforced in the spirit of the law.
Immediately after it passed, ESPECIALLY in southern states literacy tests were required for non-whites, which was intentionally done to keep former slaves and their children from voting, because slaves RARELY knew how to read or write. Poll taxes were also often enforced which kept these same groups away from the polls because they were often intentionally made to be beyond their expenses. This continued until 1953 with the Supreme Court case Terry v. Adams, which was the 7th case brought to the Supreme Court about this practice. The 7th case where the practices were struck DOWN, that is. These cases spanned nearly four decades, from 1915 (Guinn v. United States) until Terry v. Adams.
We're never really explained what the term "Civil Rights Movement" means. Sure we know what it is, but during the countless years of state schooling, I've had not once has a teacher explained what Civil Rights are. Civil Rights are what protect the freedom of individuals from being diminished by governments, organizations and private citizens.
Voting was possibly THE most important issue of the civil rights movement because, in the South, minorities were kept from registering to vote in the first place. This kept African Americans from voting in elections, but even more insidiously, it kept them from serving on juries. This meant that when an African American citizen brought a criminal charge against someone, none of the jury meant to uphold justice was truly a member of their community. This simple act of disenfranchisement kept hundreds of cases from being served with any true substance of justice or integrity.
But lets skip ahead to right now. Present day. That's all over right? Wrong. Take for instance the case of Dorothy Cooper, who had been voting for nearly 60 years when her home state of Tenneese passed legislation requiring voters to have a state-issued ID card to vote in 2012. Dorothy Cooper didn't own a car. Or have a passport. Those are things people who drive or who can afford international travel have. She'd been voting for 60 years, so what was the sudden problem?
For more recent examples you can go here.
Voter Fraud. Under the claim of stopping voter fraud, nearly 31 states have passed laws requiring IDs to vote. Even though there were only FOUR cases of fraud in November's presidential election. not Four percent, four CASES. Total.
"A FRONTLINE analysis of voting laws nationwide found that only six of the 31 states that require ID at the polls apply those standards to absentee voters, who are generally whiter and older than in-person voters. And two states with strict photo ID policies for in-person voters — Rhode Island and Georgia — have recently passed bills that allow anyone to mail in a ballot." (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/why-voter-id-laws-arent-really-about-fraud/)
So, Why are we letting people mail in ballots if they need to show proof of ID?
Because it's about keeping the 11% of minorities, or the impoverished from voting against the people in power. Certain groups do better in elections if certain groups don't vote, so it's more convenient to just prevent them from voting at all.
It's still happening in 2017, folks, make no mistake. It's just wrapped up in a lot of red-tape and blatant falsehoods to make it seem like its above-board and fair. It's not. It's a load of horse feces.
It's been "technically" illegal to discriminate voters based on race or nationality since 1870. EIGHTEEN SEVENTY. It's been ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY-SEVEN YEARS since the United States made illegal to discriminate at the voting booth. I say "Technically" because at almost no time since then has it been enforced in the spirit of the law.
Immediately after it passed, ESPECIALLY in southern states literacy tests were required for non-whites, which was intentionally done to keep former slaves and their children from voting, because slaves RARELY knew how to read or write. Poll taxes were also often enforced which kept these same groups away from the polls because they were often intentionally made to be beyond their expenses. This continued until 1953 with the Supreme Court case Terry v. Adams, which was the 7th case brought to the Supreme Court about this practice. The 7th case where the practices were struck DOWN, that is. These cases spanned nearly four decades, from 1915 (Guinn v. United States) until Terry v. Adams.
We're never really explained what the term "Civil Rights Movement" means. Sure we know what it is, but during the countless years of state schooling, I've had not once has a teacher explained what Civil Rights are. Civil Rights are what protect the freedom of individuals from being diminished by governments, organizations and private citizens.
Voting was possibly THE most important issue of the civil rights movement because, in the South, minorities were kept from registering to vote in the first place. This kept African Americans from voting in elections, but even more insidiously, it kept them from serving on juries. This meant that when an African American citizen brought a criminal charge against someone, none of the jury meant to uphold justice was truly a member of their community. This simple act of disenfranchisement kept hundreds of cases from being served with any true substance of justice or integrity.
But lets skip ahead to right now. Present day. That's all over right? Wrong. Take for instance the case of Dorothy Cooper, who had been voting for nearly 60 years when her home state of Tenneese passed legislation requiring voters to have a state-issued ID card to vote in 2012. Dorothy Cooper didn't own a car. Or have a passport. Those are things people who drive or who can afford international travel have. She'd been voting for 60 years, so what was the sudden problem?
For more recent examples you can go here.
Voter Fraud. Under the claim of stopping voter fraud, nearly 31 states have passed laws requiring IDs to vote. Even though there were only FOUR cases of fraud in November's presidential election. not Four percent, four CASES. Total.
"A FRONTLINE analysis of voting laws nationwide found that only six of the 31 states that require ID at the polls apply those standards to absentee voters, who are generally whiter and older than in-person voters. And two states with strict photo ID policies for in-person voters — Rhode Island and Georgia — have recently passed bills that allow anyone to mail in a ballot." (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/why-voter-id-laws-arent-really-about-fraud/)
So, Why are we letting people mail in ballots if they need to show proof of ID?
Because it's about keeping the 11% of minorities, or the impoverished from voting against the people in power. Certain groups do better in elections if certain groups don't vote, so it's more convenient to just prevent them from voting at all.
It's still happening in 2017, folks, make no mistake. It's just wrapped up in a lot of red-tape and blatant falsehoods to make it seem like its above-board and fair. It's not. It's a load of horse feces.
Friday, June 16, 2017
Post 4
Online Writing has altered our ability to write. Twenty years ago, to communicate with a friend who you didn't see often, you had to write them a letter (or call them, but we're discussing writing) mail it, wait for them to read it, and then wait for them to write back. When we look at letters from the past, they're often long, and touch on multiple topics before ending. We can see the remnants of this in email communication. With the introduction of instant messaging services and texting, we see that people can communicate back and forth rapidly, and move from topic to topic more easily.
Similarly, the online paradigm allows people to write as a unit more coherently. Joint publications prior to the internet required people to verbally communicate what they wanted to write and decide before putting the idea to paper, but online media has allowed collaboration to take place in real time, and co-authors can see what an idea looks like on the page and decide to keep it or not.
Similarly, the online paradigm allows people to write as a unit more coherently. Joint publications prior to the internet required people to verbally communicate what they wanted to write and decide before putting the idea to paper, but online media has allowed collaboration to take place in real time, and co-authors can see what an idea looks like on the page and decide to keep it or not.
Sunday, June 11, 2017
Post 3
I constantly need clarification. At work, instructions are sometimes vague or non-specific, and I have to send an email that describes what I am going to do in great detail, to make sure I have understood my task properly.
My friend Jay is currently working on a fictional setting he plans to write novels in, and I'm the wall he bounces ideas off of. Sometimes, he words these ideas in a way that is not at all conducive to my understanding. And I have to rephrase them, and inquire "Do I have that understood correctly?"
I think possibly one of the most important ways I write to learn is just that; rephrasing or further specifying a concept of instruction to make sure I have learned the information I need from it.
This is likely the basis for educational papers, now that I consider it. Explaining something to someone else requires us to have understood it.
Friday, June 9, 2017
Post 2: The Most Important Lesson of Composition I
Possibly the most important aspect of writing in any of its many forms is the ability to express clarity of concept. To obtain clarity in a written work, writers must strive to REVISE the work into something, well, clear. Revision allows us to take information and organize it so that it flows easily into the mind of the reader. Revision allows us to note where we have failed to inform our readers of crucial aspects that would display the full scope of our points.
"Don’t worry too much about spelling, punctuation, and similar errors right now. There’s no sense in spending a lot of time fixing capitalization and grammar, for example, if you’re going to end up deleting the whole paragraph or section anyway because you decide it’s unnecessary or it doesn’t really fit. Instead, think about the overall content of your paper. Determine whether or not the information really suits the scope and purpose of your document, and if so, where it belongs" Says Stacie Heaps, in her article "How to Revise Your Writing". This is her first step, and so too must understanding revision be our first step into the world of writing
Source
http://www.writeexpress.com/revise-writing.html
"Don’t worry too much about spelling, punctuation, and similar errors right now. There’s no sense in spending a lot of time fixing capitalization and grammar, for example, if you’re going to end up deleting the whole paragraph or section anyway because you decide it’s unnecessary or it doesn’t really fit. Instead, think about the overall content of your paper. Determine whether or not the information really suits the scope and purpose of your document, and if so, where it belongs" Says Stacie Heaps, in her article "How to Revise Your Writing". This is her first step, and so too must understanding revision be our first step into the world of writing
Source
http://www.writeexpress.com/revise-writing.html
Sunday, June 4, 2017
Post 1: My Not-So-Nifty Introduction
Hello, my name is Benjamin Schurmann. I'm twenty-four years old and I'm coming back to school after a long absence. I've been working as a dialysis technician for about two years, and I've decided to pursue a Nursing degree because healthcare really appeals to me and I'm pretty darn good at it!
I'm currently living in Atlanta, but I'm probably moving to Macon in a few months. My sister Meg is at Georgia State persuing pre-law and my other sister Bailey is a Middle School English teacher.
I'm currently living in Atlanta, but I'm probably moving to Macon in a few months. My sister Meg is at Georgia State persuing pre-law and my other sister Bailey is a Middle School English teacher.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)