Politics And The English Language Rhetoric
What is considered an effective composition? Is it the one that explains its ideas more clearly than the others? In order to have a clear and effective composition, the writer must make an appropriate use of genre. Genre provides the composition with style, design, appeal and approach towards the audience. In “Politics and the English language”, George Orwell managed to fulfill his purpose by making use of the different conventions of the composition’s genre. Orwell used his argumentative essay as a way to communicate his concern for the English language by making use of facts, evidence and a set of rules ,which served as a way to improve one’s writing skills.
As it is commonly required by argumentative essays, Orwell supported the composition’s purpose of showing the decay of the English language by exposing the common mistakes that writers, during his time, used to make. He attributed the deterioration of the English language to politics. He supported this statement with many examples. They ranged from excerpts plagued by worn out metaphors to fragments full of senseless wordiness. Most of the examples had a common mistake; they lacked focus on the message of the text. The meaning, in most of them, would get …show more content…
lost because of imagery and unnecessary ornamentation. Orwell mentioned the different kinds of obsolete metaphors used by modern writers such as, “Achilles heel, swan song, and hot bed” (99) in order to demonstrate that they deviate the reader from the text’s meaning and that they don’t actually contribute to the sense of the passage. As for examples of wordiness, the author mentioned phrases such as “Give grounds for, have the effect of” (Orwell 100) which could be replaced by single words. All of the unnecessary elements mentioned before were due to politics corrupting writing. The genre used made it easier for him to explain and support his arguments. Orwell’s essay was also able to persuade his readers about the precision of the author’s claims.
The time period in which “Politics and the English language” was written, determined Orwell’s choice for the compositions to possess a written mode, and for it to be printed. The reason why he chose it to be this way was due to the abundance of political writings in printed media at that time, as many political compositions were “To be found in leading articles, pamphlets… but they are all alike not fresh or vivid by any chance” (Orwell 104). Due to the argumentative essay being printed it was easier for Orwell to express his ideas and thoughts. It should be taken into consideration that the time period in which he wrote the argumentative essay was a post war period. The language was used as a way to disguise the different iniquities committed by the different countries. Orwell narrated “In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible” (104) in order to expose the context of the situation that he was facing as a political writer. The choice of using an argumentative essay as the way to communicate his statement was accurate for the time period in which he wrote it.
In his composition, Orwell used the structure of an argumentative essay to explain his claims and ideas accurately. “Politics and the English language” is structured as an argumentative essay. This kind of essay is used to discuss ideas and statements in regards to a certain topic with the author being able to take a position referring to the situation being discussed, in this case Modern English. Orwell structured the composition in terms of introduction, body, and conclusion. He established his position in regards to the topic at the beginning of the composition. He continued to argue about the Modern English language and how political forces have affected it. In the body, Orwell supported his ideas with facts and examples. Each one of the examples was labeled in order for the reader to turn the pages to identify which passage he was referring to. To conclude, he first summarized the points that he explained in the essay, and then encouraged the readers to correct themselves when they were able to. Therefore being able to perfect one’s writing style. The composition possessed the traditional scheme of an argumentative essay.
Orwell incorporated his own style into the composition by using figures of speech, which are not commonly used in an argumentative essay, to complement his writing.
The essay did not use visuals, but it used metaphors and similes instead to approach readers by the use of language. For example, a simile Orwell used was “Phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated hen-house” (99). He also included metaphors such as “The concrete melts into the abstract” (Orwell 99). There was no need to include images. The argumentative essay possessed an objective view of the topic being explained. It also possessed a serious tone that was to be changed in certain parts of the composition. Therefore, the essay was very detailed, informative and
appealing.
In his essay, Orwell deviated from the traditional, serious argumentative tone in order to create an emotional appeal towards the audience. He presented the audience to a moral conflict in which he demonstrated how the English language is used to suit political purposes. He implied that, by changing a few words, politicians intend to make murder sound better or as justifiable. For example, the author said, “defenseless villages are bombarded from the air… this is called pacification” (Orwell 104) as a way to point out to the reader that politics had altered language. As stated by Orwell, individuals have become capable of manipulating the language to justify unrespectable actions. He also made the reader experience joy by changing his tone from a serious to a playful one by “translating” a text from Traditional English to Modern English. This translation was a parody, which was intended to be funny for the audience. Orwell mentioned the phrase “objective consideration of contemporary phenomena” (102) as a way to demonstrate how words of daily usage are replaced by technical and scientific terms. The author did this to show how “fancy” terms, that a normal person would not use, are usually considered over precise ones.
As it is usually done, the author prioritized facts and examples as the main sources of information in the argumentative essay as a way to appeal to the audience’s knowledge. Some examples of the pieces of information he used are: the examples that he gathered from other professional authors as well as the political background he provided the audience. Orwell mentioned how everything was centered towards politics during his time, not only providing the readers with political facts but also historical ones. In fact, he mentions that it was a time of “Political disconformity” and writers who did not follow the schemes were to be considered “rebels” (Orwell 104). He informed the audience about the decay in the English language by comparing Modern English to the English spoken when he was younger. He also pointed out each of the mistakes in the examples he gave on how English had been altered by wordiness and senselessness. For example, Orwell said “Professor Laski [one of the many authors he criticized] uses five negatives in fifty-three words, uses the word superfluous that causes the passage to lose its sense”(103) and kept on pointing out the flaws that each passage possessed, doing it the same way as he did in the previous example. Orwell’s choice of using an argumentative essay as the genre for his composition made him able to communicate his thoughts didactically.
Orwell was personally involved with his own work, therefore, he was able to affect his credibility by making use of ethos. He maintains his position against the Modern English language, but he also recognizes the fact that he is able to make mistakes. In fact he points it out by saying: “Look back through this essay… I have again and again committed the very faults I am protesting against” (Orwell 105). Therefore, the audience can perceive Orwell as an honest author. One is able to appreciate his commitment to the English language due to his choice of using an argumentative essay to describe the circumstances by which the language had been corrupted. Aside from using an objective tone, Orwell made the essay sound personal. The audience is able to appreciate the author’s concern for sense making compositions. Orwell mentions the last rule to be applied when writing a composition. The rule reads: “Break any of these rules [the ones stated before in his essay] sooner than say anything outright barbarous” (Orwell 107). Orwell is not only committed to the topic but also to his audience.
The argumentative essay’s traditional design was affected by the introduction of many rules that were to stand out from the rest of the texts, in order to allow Orwell to provide the reader with advice. Among the rules mentioned by the author were: “If it is possible to eliminate a word, do it” and “Never use a long word when a short one will do” (Orwell 107). Therefore, wordiness, excess of technical terms, long phrases; all of them can be avoided just by following the rules Orwell provided on the essay. If the media through which the composition was presented, was to be changed, it will most likely be to an online media. The composition would be plagued by images due to rules and examples mentioned previously. The composition would change to the format of a “how to” therefore the genre of the composition would be altered.
Due to “Politics and the English language” being an argumentative essay, the composition was accessible to general audiences. Orwell intended to guide the reader through the process of writing a composition by making use of an understandable structure, simple language and appeals that were provided by the genre. This previous assumption was confirmed when he stated that he has considered language as “An instrument for expressing and not for concealing or preventing thought” (Orwell 107). He encouraged the audience to write differently to what was commonly referred to as Modern English, hence, in a simpler way. When writing a composition, one may face different obstacles but the ones mentioned by Orwell are the most common. Anyone is able to relate to Orwell’s point of view due to the fact that most people have fallen into these mistakes. He wanted the audience to be aware of the changes and transformations the English language had faced throughout the years.
By using his argumentative essay as a way to communicate his ideas, Orwell demonstrated his preoccupation for the decay of the English language. Orwell’s points of view and ideas in regards to the topic were supported by the different examples and rules, introduced in his composition. The essay used the rules as a way to improve the way people write and speak. Recalling the question posed at the very beginning of this essay, a composition that makes proper use of genre conventions tends to be simple, clear, and highly effective. Orwell intended for the reader to have the notion that one might not achieve perfection, but there is always room for improvement.
As it is commonly required by argumentative essays, Orwell supported the composition’s purpose of showing the decay of the English language by exposing the common mistakes that writers, during his time, used to make. He attributed the deterioration of the English language to politics. He supported this statement with many examples. They ranged from excerpts plagued by worn out metaphors to fragments full of senseless wordiness. Most of the examples had a common mistake; they lacked focus on the message of the text. The meaning, in most of them, would get …show more content…
lost because of imagery and unnecessary ornamentation. Orwell mentioned the different kinds of obsolete metaphors used by modern writers such as, “Achilles heel, swan song, and hot bed” (99) in order to demonstrate that they deviate the reader from the text’s meaning and that they don’t actually contribute to the sense of the passage. As for examples of wordiness, the author mentioned phrases such as “Give grounds for, have the effect of” (Orwell 100) which could be replaced by single words. All of the unnecessary elements mentioned before were due to politics corrupting writing. The genre used made it easier for him to explain and support his arguments. Orwell’s essay was also able to persuade his readers about the precision of the author’s claims.
The time period in which “Politics and the English language” was written, determined Orwell’s choice for the compositions to possess a written mode, and for it to be printed. The reason why he chose it to be this way was due to the abundance of political writings in printed media at that time, as many political compositions were “To be found in leading articles, pamphlets… but they are all alike not fresh or vivid by any chance” (Orwell 104). Due to the argumentative essay being printed it was easier for Orwell to express his ideas and thoughts. It should be taken into consideration that the time period in which he wrote the argumentative essay was a post war period. The language was used as a way to disguise the different iniquities committed by the different countries. Orwell narrated “In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible” (104) in order to expose the context of the situation that he was facing as a political writer. The choice of using an argumentative essay as the way to communicate his statement was accurate for the time period in which he wrote it.
In his composition, Orwell used the structure of an argumentative essay to explain his claims and ideas accurately. “Politics and the English language” is structured as an argumentative essay. This kind of essay is used to discuss ideas and statements in regards to a certain topic with the author being able to take a position referring to the situation being discussed, in this case Modern English. Orwell structured the composition in terms of introduction, body, and conclusion. He established his position in regards to the topic at the beginning of the composition. He continued to argue about the Modern English language and how political forces have affected it. In the body, Orwell supported his ideas with facts and examples. Each one of the examples was labeled in order for the reader to turn the pages to identify which passage he was referring to. To conclude, he first summarized the points that he explained in the essay, and then encouraged the readers to correct themselves when they were able to. Therefore being able to perfect one’s writing style. The composition possessed the traditional scheme of an argumentative essay.
Orwell incorporated his own style into the composition by using figures of speech, which are not commonly used in an argumentative essay, to complement his writing.
The essay did not use visuals, but it used metaphors and similes instead to approach readers by the use of language. For example, a simile Orwell used was “Phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated hen-house” (99). He also included metaphors such as “The concrete melts into the abstract” (Orwell 99). There was no need to include images. The argumentative essay possessed an objective view of the topic being explained. It also possessed a serious tone that was to be changed in certain parts of the composition. Therefore, the essay was very detailed, informative and
appealing.
In his essay, Orwell deviated from the traditional, serious argumentative tone in order to create an emotional appeal towards the audience. He presented the audience to a moral conflict in which he demonstrated how the English language is used to suit political purposes. He implied that, by changing a few words, politicians intend to make murder sound better or as justifiable. For example, the author said, “defenseless villages are bombarded from the air… this is called pacification” (Orwell 104) as a way to point out to the reader that politics had altered language. As stated by Orwell, individuals have become capable of manipulating the language to justify unrespectable actions. He also made the reader experience joy by changing his tone from a serious to a playful one by “translating” a text from Traditional English to Modern English. This translation was a parody, which was intended to be funny for the audience. Orwell mentioned the phrase “objective consideration of contemporary phenomena” (102) as a way to demonstrate how words of daily usage are replaced by technical and scientific terms. The author did this to show how “fancy” terms, that a normal person would not use, are usually considered over precise ones.
As it is usually done, the author prioritized facts and examples as the main sources of information in the argumentative essay as a way to appeal to the audience’s knowledge. Some examples of the pieces of information he used are: the examples that he gathered from other professional authors as well as the political background he provided the audience. Orwell mentioned how everything was centered towards politics during his time, not only providing the readers with political facts but also historical ones. In fact, he mentions that it was a time of “Political disconformity” and writers who did not follow the schemes were to be considered “rebels” (Orwell 104). He informed the audience about the decay in the English language by comparing Modern English to the English spoken when he was younger. He also pointed out each of the mistakes in the examples he gave on how English had been altered by wordiness and senselessness. For example, Orwell said “Professor Laski [one of the many authors he criticized] uses five negatives in fifty-three words, uses the word superfluous that causes the passage to lose its sense”(103) and kept on pointing out the flaws that each passage possessed, doing it the same way as he did in the previous example. Orwell’s choice of using an argumentative essay as the genre for his composition made him able to communicate his thoughts didactically.
Orwell was personally involved with his own work, therefore, he was able to affect his credibility by making use of ethos. He maintains his position against the Modern English language, but he also recognizes the fact that he is able to make mistakes. In fact he points it out by saying: “Look back through this essay… I have again and again committed the very faults I am protesting against” (Orwell 105). Therefore, the audience can perceive Orwell as an honest author. One is able to appreciate his commitment to the English language due to his choice of using an argumentative essay to describe the circumstances by which the language had been corrupted. Aside from using an objective tone, Orwell made the essay sound personal. The audience is able to appreciate the author’s concern for sense making compositions. Orwell mentions the last rule to be applied when writing a composition. The rule reads: “Break any of these rules [the ones stated before in his essay] sooner than say anything outright barbarous” (Orwell 107). Orwell is not only committed to the topic but also to his audience.
The argumentative essay’s traditional design was affected by the introduction of many rules that were to stand out from the rest of the texts, in order to allow Orwell to provide the reader with advice. Among the rules mentioned by the author were: “If it is possible to eliminate a word, do it” and “Never use a long word when a short one will do” (Orwell 107). Therefore, wordiness, excess of technical terms, long phrases; all of them can be avoided just by following the rules Orwell provided on the essay. If the media through which the composition was presented, was to be changed, it will most likely be to an online media. The composition would be plagued by images due to rules and examples mentioned previously. The composition would change to the format of a “how to” therefore the genre of the composition would be altered.
Due to “Politics and the English language” being an argumentative essay, the composition was accessible to general audiences. Orwell intended to guide the reader through the process of writing a composition by making use of an understandable structure, simple language and appeals that were provided by the genre. This previous assumption was confirmed when he stated that he has considered language as “An instrument for expressing and not for concealing or preventing thought” (Orwell 107). He encouraged the audience to write differently to what was commonly referred to as Modern English, hence, in a simpler way. When writing a composition, one may face different obstacles but the ones mentioned by Orwell are the most common. Anyone is able to relate to Orwell’s point of view due to the fact that most people have fallen into these mistakes. He wanted the audience to be aware of the changes and transformations the English language had faced throughout the years.
By using his argumentative essay as a way to communicate his ideas, Orwell demonstrated his preoccupation for the decay of the English language. Orwell’s points of view and ideas in regards to the topic were supported by the different examples and rules, introduced in his composition. The essay used the rules as a way to improve the way people write and speak. Recalling the question posed at the very beginning of this essay, a composition that makes proper use of genre conventions tends to be simple, clear, and highly effective. Orwell intended for the reader to have the notion that one might not achieve perfection, but there is always room for improvement.