blog 6

The article I read is “A Way With Words, or Away With Words: Effect of Texting and IMing on Language” written by Timothy Barrance. This argument of this article is very closed to our daily lives, which means that the author can have a very effective communication with readers and which may be very easy to understand.

I pick the example of paraphrase as: “it could be argued that today’s youth are becoming bilingual without even realizing it” and author writes like this:” it could be argued that today’s youth are becoming bilingual without even realizing it, and studies have shown for decades that learning a second language is of great benefit.” What I want to say is that author, in particular, did not change any word of his paraphrase but add another sentence to explain the former. This seems to be an unusual approach to use paraphrase. But I think in this way we readers can understand clearly what exactly author wanted to express and what was the real importance following the sentence. In other words, this paraphrase attracted my attention to some extent. After reading that sentence I really eager to know what the studies were.

And about the quotation part, I chose this quotation as example: “Naomo baron, a professor of linguistics at American University in Washington D.C., notes,’ data suggests that when teenagers transition to college, they naturally shed some of their adolescent linguistic ways in favor of more formal writing conventions’ (Baron 31)”. In this quotation, I think, author pointed out the certain time in our lives that the transition takes place, and that is a convincing evidence to prove that teenagers will change their linguistic system when they are really grown up. And author used one more quotation from “Baron” to support his point of view. I think use several quotations from a same source for a single issue will be a more convincing method to guide readers to have the same conclusion with author’s.

blog 5

When we are talking something that related to history, we may hold our own opinion to the same event, even if the opinion might be extremely different, we still treat our own opinion as reasonable thinking. The same condition we can see when a period of history is being written.

Just taking the history of the struggle time during the anti-Japanese war for a suasive example.
The war ended at 1945, almost 70 years passed , I learnt from internet that the text in Japanese history book says that it were Chinese who started the war and who wanted to invade Japan. A student in primary school, whose father is a Japanese and mother is a Chinese, told his mother that he hated Chinese from bottom of his heart. What was more ridiculous, when his mother told him his mother is a Chinese. He said without any doubt: I wish that when mosquitos bite me just let it suck away my Chinese blood! We won the war but what did those Japanese historian do when they publishing the textbook? There was a saying from Vladimir Lenin:” Forgetting the past means betrayal.” In our textbook truth is described equitably. Who was winner, who was loser, we can tell from the attitudes that they treating the history.

We should treat history fairly; reality and truth can never be changed no matter how hard someone tried. When we Chinese recall that period of history，besides the broken-hearted felling and the sorrowful tears, we still have the furious mind to their behaviors. Losers do not want to admit the deviltry they had done, whilst winners take that period of time seriously.