Week nine

This is from a research paper I wrote for English 302 in the spring. It was for the linguistics unit of the class, and I opted to write about John Searle's classification of speech acts, and how they are used in online spaces. Passive voice/transitive verbs will be bolded and in green, abstract subjects will be bolded and in blue, and linking verbs will be bolded and in red. I've decided not to include the introduction in this excerpt, because I feel that the actual “meat” of the paper (if you will) is more overblown and lardy. (Also, even though it was not one of the requirements, I will be highlighting prepositional phrases in yellow.) (Another side note: apologies for the formatting being a total mess, I had to re-download this from Google because I lost the original, and this is what I got.)

_____

The main question that was to be answered in this paper was the question of which speech acts

in particular are used to respond to inflammatory posts or comments in an online setting. My theory

uses John Searle's classification of speech acts, wherein he states that there are five different

illocutionary speech acts: assertives; directives; commissives; expressives; and declarations (Searle

1975). I theorized that assertives would be used most often in responding to these kinds of posts or

comments, with the rationale being that assertives are used to “commit a speaker to the truth of an

expressed proposition” (Searle 1975), and, in niche settings, people are eager to identify with the group

of which the niche consists (?), or the group that is challenging the niche group. In feminist settings, and

particularly in settings where “men's rights” activists (hereafter referred to as “MRAs”) are the majority

population, gender is obviously the biggest distinction between these two groups of people. Age and

social standing appear to be of no consequence in these arguments, possibly because this information is

not readily available to other parties, which correlates with the anonymity provided by the internet.

Additionally, previous research suggests that feminist forums are particularly vulnerable, as “they must

balance inclusive ideals against the need for protection and safety, a tension that can be exploited by

disruptive elements to generate intragroup conflict” (Herring et al. 2011).

To find my data, I exclusively observed online sources, as they were more than appropriate for

the kind of information I was trying to glean. I had initially intended to find my information through

blogs that are of a feminist/womanist bent, but discovered that the vast majority of well-

known, “mainstream” feminist blogs have a policy of deleting any trolling or off-topic arguments in the

comments. This made it relatively hard to find data on these sites, as the majority of the speech

examined fell under their description of trolling, even if it may not have been considered trolling in

other forums. For this reason, I then narrowed my horizons to Reddit, where comments and posts in

the “subreddits” are stated to be similarly moderated, but in reality, are not. I then further narrowed my

sample area to one post on Reddit in the “r/MensRights” group that received over 1,500 comments

from MRAs, feminists, anti-feminists, and many participants who represented various other groups.

(Worth noting is that the original poster identifies as atheist, so atheists were significantly represented

in the group, though this had no bearing on the arguments or speech acts used.)

___

Rewrite: In this paper, the main question I strove to answer was: Which speech acts are found in responses to inflammatory online materials? To answer this, I used John Searle's classification of speech acts, which includes five illocutionary speech acts: assertives; directives; commissives; expressives; and declarations (Searle 1975). I figured that assertives would appear most often, as they "commit a speaker to the truth of an expressed proposition” (Searle 1975). In feminist settings, especially when "men's rights" activists are significantly present, gender is obviously the main distinction between the sparring parties. Age and social standing do not appear to matter, possibly because this information is not necessarily publicly shown. This correlates with the anonymity provided by the internet. Also, research suggests the vulnerability of feminist forums, who "must balance inclusive ideals against the need for protection and safety, a tension that can be exploited by disruptive elements to generate intragroup conflict” (Herring et al. 2011).

For this data, I only observed online sources. I had wanted to find the data on feminist blogs, but the majority of "mainstream" ones generally delete off-topic arguments or "trolling" in the comments. Because of this, I could not find sufficient data on these sites, and moved my sights to Reddit, where comments/posts on "subreddits" are frequently unmoderated. Finally, I narrowed my sample area to a post with over 1,500 comments from many participants who represented many groups.

Original: 425 words

Rewrite: 232 words

Week eight

I had a little bit of trouble identifying the active and passive voice; I marked [av] every verb that sounded even remotely active without giving any thought to which ones were transitive verbs, and which ones were simply linking. I was told [pv] that I needed more to go on from my journal page, so hopefully I will do okay.

I am still really interested in the brush strokes, yet I can't seem to find a lot of evidence of them having been used in my earlier papers. I think I am wary of over-expressing myself in academic papers, and reluctant to let them sound florid, but perhaps using the brush strokes will make my papers even better. The problem, strange and daunting, still looms. I do not want to make my papers sound too over-done or over-thought, as my grades have been lowered for doing such things in the past. Changing my style completely to get better grades, I realize there are tasteful ways to incorporate more drama into academic writing. I have been quite leery for some time of making it sound like I have nothing to say and am padding my paper with obnoxious fluff in order to hit some kind of limit.

I mean, I can say something like, “The paper, a scroll of nothingness that filled up the table, stopped being meaningful long before its end.” However, that seems unbelievably out of place, and like I'm just trying to use the most lurid language I possibly can in order to either make myself sound smarter, or fill a page. Mind racing, hands flying over the keys, I desperately try to find a balance between ridiculous and supplementary. I like that one a little better, but it still seems strange and a little forced. I guess practice makes perfect in an instance like this. It's up to me to strike the balance in my own writing.

Adjectives out of order

Participles

Appositives

Absolutes

Week seven

I'm really interested in the “brush strokes” that we learned about earlier in the week. I am always looking for ways to make my writing more descriptive without making it florid, and I think that these are really useful tools to have, especially if we want to write creatively in the future. I think that I've been doing these things without really realizing it for some time, but it's nice to have them in my repertoire now.

For example, for me, finding the fine line between fleshing out your characters' descriptions and overdoing it can be difficult. I have read stories that tell us everything about the way a character looks, right down to what brand of mascara she is wearing, or what color the stripes on his Adidas are, and, conversely, I have read stories that leave me wondering if the character described even has any physical characteristics whatsoever. (That sentence is a little overlong. I'm still learning.)

One of the things I really like about the “brush strokes” is that they give you a lot of different ways to say the same thing, which is something I always appreciate. For example, with a little tweaking, you basically have infinite ways to say something as simple as, “The blonde girl cried.”

“Painting with participles”: Hugging herself to protect from the cold, the blonde girl wept bitterly in the cold.

“Painting with absolutes”: Body shaking, eyes streaming, the blonde girl cried like her life depended on the tears.

“Painting with appositives”: The girl, a pale ghost with even lighter hair, sobbed without respite for hours.

“Painting with adjectives out of order”: The girl, pale and hunched, wept silently.

I realize that outright providing examples like that rather than trying to incorporate them them into the actual blog post is kind of going for the low-hanging fruit, as it were, but I wanted to do it like this because I wanted to use examples that are more creative than technical, if that makes sense. With that said, I look forward to working more on these in the future, because I think they will be quite helpful (especially in that “one chapter” assignment a few of us are working on for English 325 – of course, I can't speak to these techniques' helpfulness for other people, but hey).