Drink Up—But Wisely
When was the last time you refused a glass of wine while savoring a plate of fresh salmon at your favorite French restaurant? Or perhaps you nixed a beer your buddy offered you as you cheered Barry Bonds around the bases one hot July afternoon. I used choice words (diction) such as "savoring" (a strong verb), "fresh salmon" (a concrete noun), "French restaurant" (a specific noun) to add color to my opening (remember, my composition students: lower levels of generality). "Nixed" was deliberately chosen as a strong verb and contrast to the earlier (more delicate sounding) "refuse." "Buddy" is more specific than "friend" (it's a kind of friendship among males), so more colorful. "Cheered" was used as a strong (and specific) verb and Barry Bonds is both concrete and specific (a special kind of "ballplayer"). Compare if I had said, "watched a ballgame" instead of "cheered Barry Bonds." Can you see/hear the difference? And, of course, "July" afternoon is more specific than nothing "watched a ballgame." or "one afternoon." But lower levels of specificity, as all other issues in writing/speaking are a matter of judgment. Later when I refer to "children should not drink" there's no point in being less general. The writer/reader must always vary generality and specificity, like a good baseball pitcher varies his pitches. A pitcher with just one pitch will not make it past the first inning, just like a speaker/writer with just one diction (choice of words) or sentence structure (long, short, complete, incomplete, simple, compound, complex) or level of generality (low or high) will not make it past the first five minutes of a speech or the first two paragraphs of an essay. Variety is the spice of life as of composition. Of course all rules are meant to be broken too. When Poe keeps a single tone it's for deliberate effect. That's different. He knows what he's doing. Knowing is halfway there.
Note that I changed "Perhaps" to a longer phrase, known as an expletive ("it is/it was/there are," etc.). The reason is first, the repetition of "perhaps" linking two different ideas (one in the last paragraph) may have confused the listener regarding coherence of ideas (the new idea may be linked with the last series of occasions when one was offered a drink. So I changed "perhaps" to the synonym, "maybe." But, second, the expletive ("it was") adds emphasis to my new idea about the causes for refusing a drink. I concluded with a coordinate conjunction ("Or"), easily insuring coherence while sounding casual. A strong (and dramatic) verb "dreaded," was followed by a choice use of diction, "drunkard."
Well, relax. It's a fact that drinking is not only acceptable but beneficial. This is because alcohol has an ingredient that I can't pronounce but I know is good for you.
"Well, relax," is an incomplete sentence, but correctly idiomatic for speech purposes. It also varies my sentence structure, making a natural rhythm of speech. Then I use another expletive in contractive form ("It's") to emphasize a key point, the fact that drinking is good for you. My correlative conjunction ("not only" . . . "but also") adds coherence and (by antithesis) emphasis. (Some writers omit the final balancing "only," as I did.) Further emphasis is given by the use of the demonstrative pronoun ("This") in the next sentence; a demonstrative pronoun "points" back, replacing a previous noun, thus insuring coherence. At the same time, I follow effect with cause ("This is because"), again insuring both logic and coherence by the commonplace of "cause-effect." "Ingredient" develops my "cause-effect" topic, but "I can't pronounce" adds a casual humor to my speech, hopefully helping my listeners accept me as an ordinary person—just like them. (I love dashes, properly used, of course.)
However, like everything, drinking should be in moderation. That means one or two glasses of wine a day or the same amount of alcohol in other forms.
The adversative conjunction ("However") again insures coherence, since the listener knows that now I'm opposing my last idea with a new ("opposite") one. "Like everything" works by analogy (another commonplace). Then I define my word "moderation" ("one or two glasses of wine," etc.).
A 2004 study, by the Danish Institute of Medicine, concluded that one or two drinks a day reduces heart and stroke risks in most people. Drinkers also live longer than non-drinkers.
Note I date the study (2004) and name it (Danish Institute of Medicine), although I made up the study (there is no such study, as far as I know; this was only for sample purposes). Then I give another cause/effect argument ("reduces heart and stroke risks," etc.). With use of another coherence adverb ("also") I give another cause/effect sample.
Of course, too much of a good thing is bad. Studies show that drinkers who have more than two drinks a day are at higher risk for heart attacks and strokes.
"Of course" is another coherence or transition phrase. Then I use a cliche (pronounced clee-SHAY and requiring an accent acute over the e). Cliches can be a problem, but they can also establish "rapport" or "togetherness" with your audience, since you're telling your audience that you hold their "common values" and use their common idioms. "Studies show" may not be enough in a more formal presentation! But for a short speech judged mostly on choice of words, fluency, etc. (the criteria for ESL students) that may be enough. Otherwise, I would have to get more specific. I've already proved to my auditors (listeners) that I can cite a definite source (the Danish study), so when I use a more general reference ("studies") the audience has more confidence in my general reference.
Besides, there are special circumstances to consider. Children for example should never drink. Also don't mix drinks and pills.
"Besides" is another common coherence device; while "special circumstances" brings my topic down to a lower level of generality. Then I give examples ("children," "drinks and pills," and "pregnant women": I might have used the alternate phrase, "expectant mothers," but "pregnant" sounded stronger in medical terms and my reference here is medical. Note my simple coherence word ("also") and the even simpler conjunction ("And"), with which I begin my final sentence for emphasis.
Now I use a common antithetical (opposing) conjunction, "but." "But" is better sometimes than "however"; it's a matter of sound sometimes and the fewer syllables in an informal speech the better. Note how many short words I use. This speech is designed to be read not simply as a school exercise. The words are short and also the sentences. Why show off with long sentences and many-syllable words, but put my audience to sleep? Finally, I oppose the word "medical" and "legal," another coherence device. The repetition of the word "standards" (in blue font) increases coherence.
You see, even moderate amounts of alcohol may reduce reaction time. In some cases, a few seconds may make a difference whether you arrive safely home or not. Heading for home, you may end up at a hospital—or even at a police station.
"You see" is a colloquial (casual, everyday) locution, not good for formal writing, but adding variety and tone to an informal speech. Then I use cause/effect ("arrive safely home"). I use my favorite punctuation, a dash, for emphasis, then decided to add a preposition which I had omitted in my previous version.
Apart from such caution, enjoy a drink or two.
Besides health benefits, alcohol is good company at the dinner table, aiding digestion and chat.
All of my paragraphs begin with simple coherence devices. Here I use the phrase, "apart from." My replacement word "such" points back to my previous topic, adding coherence, while "caution" generalizes the list of specific examples given in my last paragraph, again insuring coherence. Then I return to my main topic ("enjoy a good drink"). A metaphor (drink as "company") subtly adds color to my language, followed by cause/effect again ("aiding digestion and chat"). "Chat" itself is a choice word (I might have used many synonymic words, but liked "chat" because it was easy-sounding or casual, a big part of the tone of my speech. Besides, I knew that in my next sentence I was going to use "conversation" and wanted variety.
Good conversation flows with good wine. Only be sure the wine doesn't flow too much, or it may be too much of a good thing.
"Conversation" varies the previous word "chat," while creating coherence by replacing it, thus referring back to it. The repetition of "flows" adds coherence, while also using both metaphor and syllepsis (using the same verb in two different meanings, a rhetorical trope or style). Then the repetition of "too much" adds rhythm to my conclusion. Note how "good thing" insures a sense of focus, since (after all) my speech is about drinking as a "good thing," not a "bad thing." Finally, while maintaining my focus (drinking can be good for you), even in such a short space I gave ample time to the other side too (drinking can be bad for you). Ironically, the audience has more confidence in your siding after hearing you present both sides, rather than less confidence. Because the audience knows you have considered the opposite side, hence has more confidence (are more willing to believe) you when you take sides. In other words, you've done their thinking for them, forcing them to accept your conclusion as their own.
Drink Up—But Wisely
When was the last time you refused a glass of wine while savoring a plate of fresh salmon at your favorite French restaurant? Or perhaps you nixed a beer your buddy offered you as you cheered Barry Bonds around the bases one hot July afternoon. Maybe it was because your mother warned you about the dangers of drink. Or you dreaded that word, "drunkard."
Well, relax. It's a fact that drinking is not only acceptable but beneficial. This is because alcohol has an ingredient that I can't pronounce but I know is good for you.
However, like everything, drinking should be in moderation. That means one or two glasses of wine a day or the same amount of alcohol in other forms.
A 2004 study, by the Danish Institute of Medicine, concluded that one or two drinks a day reduces heart and stroke risks in most people. Drinkers also live longer than non-drinkers.
Of course, too much of a good thing is bad. Studies show that drinkers who have more than two drinks a day are at higher risk for heart attacks and strokes.
Besides, there are special circumstances to consider. Children for example should never drink. Also don't mix drinks and pills. And pregnant women are wise to keep away from drinking during their term.
But risks are not only medical. Drinkers may meet medical standards of moderation, but not legal standards if they drive after drinking.
You see, even moderate amounts of alcohol may reduce reaction time. In some cases, a few seconds may make a difference whether you arrive safely home or not. Heading for home, you may end up at a hospital—or even at a police station.
Apart from such caution, enjoy a drink or two.
Besides health benefits, alcohol is good company at the dinner table, aiding digestion and chat.
Good conversation flows with good wine. Only be sure the wine doesn't flow too much, or it may be too much of a good thing.
The following is an example of one possible speech text, taken from the first soliliquy (solo speech) in Twelfth Night. Here you would have to understand the context of the speech; the character's feelings (the feelings behind the words, as well as the thoughts behind the words): "The coffee is hot" (a simple sentence) may express a complex thought ("I no longer love you": when you love someone everything they do is fine). All actors break down their lines (dialogues/monologues) into units of thought and feeling.
Of course, you must also do the spade (beginning work) of understanding the literal use of every word, its connotations, its pronunciation, with respect to the poetic line too. You can see that Shakespeare's verse is "iambic pentameter." "Iambic" feet (units) are short/long, as in the word, "be-HAVE." The line is then FIVE of these feet or units. A dumb line would have, "Behave, behave, behave, behave, behave." That does not mean the poet keeps strictly to the units; there is some variation; for example, "behave" may be followed by Nancy, "behave Nancy." This would reverse the stress; instead of short/long, we have now long/short. Shakespeare, in one remarkable line of one single word, does this five times, to show King Lear's despair: "Never, never, never, never, never."
Also observe contractions, such as "o'er" for "over"; this is called poetic license, to keep the rhythm of the unit. The word must be pronounced as is written, not replaced with "over"!
We'll talk about more dramatic issues of reading lines later.
For next class, work on introducing yourself as a teacher to a specified class of students. You should aim for appropriate delivery (audience changes delivery; speaking to five-year olds is differrent from speaking to graduate students, etc.), coherence (ideas should follow one another in logical order), and completeness of ideas (there should be no unanswered questions in students' minds).. Here are some issues you might wish to consider (not necessarily in this order):
1. Name.
2. Goal of class.
3. Subject range ("Photography" can mean anything; the teacher must explain what it means for that class.)
4. Evaluation standards.
5. Testing.
6. Attendance and arrival.
7. Course requirements (duties, acquisitions, resources, etc.).
8. Times (hours and period).
9. Personal information.
10. A (very) brief outline of class content.
1. Name.
2. Goal of class.
3. Subject range ("Photography" can mean anything; the teacher must explain what it means for that class.)
4. Evaluation standards.
5. Testing.
6. Attendance and arrival.
7. Course requirements (duties, acquisitions, resources, etc.).
8. Times (hours and period).
9. Personal information.
10. A (very) brief outline of class content.
1. When preparing your presentation (about 3 minutes, because we need input from other students, inc. topical questions), try to think like your opponent. Police do this as well as athletes: what would the murderer do after leaving the home; how will Moose Hardaway run the ball against our defense? etc. (I made up Moose Hardaway's name).
2. Always use the commonplaces we've discussed in the past: definition, comparison, analogy, division, degree (more and less), cause/effect, and testimony (quotation) are especially important.
3. Example: Cloning: what are the effects of cloning. What are the causes of cloning (why would people clone)? What do you mean by cloning, including limits or restrictions. (Is IQ important? Physical beauty? etc.) What do experts say about cloning. Whcih values are more important in this issue (for example, traditional values vs. scientific or commercial values (the profit motive in cloning).
4. You can also use the 5 W's and H we spoke about: Who, What, Why, Where, When, How.
5. Take my wife--please! No, I mean, take smoking: WHY do people smoke? (This might give some substitutes for smoking.) Why does society have the right to prevent smoking? (Another use of "why.") Why prevent smoking? Where would smoking be prevented (just restaurants? all places? taxi cabs? in movie theatres?). How would one enforce the law (fines, prison, warning, etc.). What are the consequences of smoking. (As in all topics, the writer/speaker decides how to focus the term; "why" in other words can be used in many questions of different kinds.
6. Here's another "heuristic" made up by Kenneth Burke, called the PENTAD because it is made up of FIVE classes:
1. Scene. (Where, When?)
2. Agent. (Who?)
3. Agency. (How?)
4. Act. (What?)
5. Purpose. (Why)
Burke called this Pentad, Dramatism. Every act (including a speech) is a drama and must respond to these five members of the Pentad. Take smoking. This is an act. The SCENE of smoking is defined by the speaker (taxi's, restaurants, etc.). The AGENT may be defined as Society, or the smoker (depending on the speaker's focus). The AGENCY (HOW) might describe the means of effecting the goal of preventing smokers from smoking. The ACT (WHAT) might be the law projected. The PURPOSE is the effect of the no-smoking law.
You can see where this is similar to the editorial 5 W's and H. The most important point for writers and speakers is that these are only checklists, heuristic (discovery) devices to help the writer/reader. Don't get bogged down in them, missing the trees for the forest. USE them, as one uses a notepad to write down one's shopping items. If it works, use it; if it doesn't work, use another heuristic device. A heuristic device might be as primitive or basic as a time limit or performer. If I'm writing a song for a five year old, that child's limits will help me write my song, just as the vocal skills of a Pavarotti will help too, in different ways. Rex Harrison's lack of vocal skills helped composer write entirely new types of melodies for him in the musical My Fair Lady, which revolutionized the Broadway musical. Whatever heuristic devices you find, use them. Rhyme for example is an heuristic device. Hip hop singers use rhyme in their music, which must help them come up with creative ideas. Meter (rhythm) is another heuristic device (Wordsworth wrote a great sonnet about writing sonnets!). Thinking of an interlocutor (somebody challenging your ideas is, as I said in class, another heuristic device. All good writers/speakers simply hold dialogues with themselves as they write their essays or speeches. Good luck.
2. Always use the commonplaces we've discussed in the past: definition, comparison, analogy, division, degree (more and less), cause/effect, and testimony (quotation) are especially important.
3. Example: Cloning: what are the effects of cloning. What are the causes of cloning (why would people clone)? What do you mean by cloning, including limits or restrictions. (Is IQ important? Physical beauty? etc.) What do experts say about cloning. Whcih values are more important in this issue (for example, traditional values vs. scientific or commercial values (the profit motive in cloning).
4. You can also use the 5 W's and H we spoke about: Who, What, Why, Where, When, How.
5. Take my wife--please! No, I mean, take smoking: WHY do people smoke? (This might give some substitutes for smoking.) Why does society have the right to prevent smoking? (Another use of "why.") Why prevent smoking? Where would smoking be prevented (just restaurants? all places? taxi cabs? in movie theatres?). How would one enforce the law (fines, prison, warning, etc.). What are the consequences of smoking. (As in all topics, the writer/speaker decides how to focus the term; "why" in other words can be used in many questions of different kinds.
6. Here's another "heuristic" made up by Kenneth Burke, called the PENTAD because it is made up of FIVE classes:
1. Scene. (Where, When?)
2. Agent. (Who?)
3. Agency. (How?)
4. Act. (What?)
5. Purpose. (Why)
Burke called this Pentad, Dramatism. Every act (including a speech) is a drama and must respond to these five members of the Pentad. Take smoking. This is an act. The SCENE of smoking is defined by the speaker (taxi's, restaurants, etc.). The AGENT may be defined as Society, or the smoker (depending on the speaker's focus). The AGENCY (HOW) might describe the means of effecting the goal of preventing smokers from smoking. The ACT (WHAT) might be the law projected. The PURPOSE is the effect of the no-smoking law.
You can see where this is similar to the editorial 5 W's and H. The most important point for writers and speakers is that these are only checklists, heuristic (discovery) devices to help the writer/reader. Don't get bogged down in them, missing the trees for the forest. USE them, as one uses a notepad to write down one's shopping items. If it works, use it; if it doesn't work, use another heuristic device. A heuristic device might be as primitive or basic as a time limit or performer. If I'm writing a song for a five year old, that child's limits will help me write my song, just as the vocal skills of a Pavarotti will help too, in different ways. Rex Harrison's lack of vocal skills helped composer write entirely new types of melodies for him in the musical My Fair Lady, which revolutionized the Broadway musical. Whatever heuristic devices you find, use them. Rhyme for example is an heuristic device. Hip hop singers use rhyme in their music, which must help them come up with creative ideas. Meter (rhythm) is another heuristic device (Wordsworth wrote a great sonnet about writing sonnets!). Thinking of an interlocutor (somebody challenging your ideas is, as I said in class, another heuristic device. All good writers/speakers simply hold dialogues with themselves as they write their essays or speeches. Good luck.
No comments:
Post a Comment