English 328 Log

2004-04-01T13:09:00.000-08:00

March 31, 2004
Birkerts made the point that digital text is replcing written text and that telecommunications is the future-the railroad of capitalism. He describes an Engilsh professor quitting his profession becuase his art was dying and telecommunications is the new thing. This will apply to me as a teacher because it will affect what I teach and the future of my job and how we use literature. People are not reading as much these days, and telecommunications are changing the way we use English. Sosnoski talks about how texts make things more readily and easily available and that there are benefits to skimming, different reading strategies and that this technology will affect the medium I use to teach and what I teach, as well as how literature will be taught.

2004-03-20T16:37:00.000-08:00

Books are easy to work with because they have tables of contents, indexes, etc. so you can easily locate the information you need. There are no technological glitches when you are using a book, and you don't have to wait for pages to load; they are already there. The text is easy to read, books are portable, the book puts the links and coherence together for you, and they are easy to work with because we are used to them, and they are pretty durable, and inexpensive. Books are tough to work with becuase they are longer than websites and can be lengthy, there is no search that will quickly bring up results, they can be expensive, and they can be lost.

2004-03-15T13:55:00.000-08:00

Matilda is both a movie I have seen and a book that I have read. There is a difference between reading the novel and seeing the movie. I was better able to connect to the movie, because I had visuals and images. I could see how Matilda was being treated and I was better able to understand what that would be like and react. I saw what Matilda looked like, how ugly the headmistress was, how gross her parents were, etc. I saw her magic. In the book it was hard to understand what was going on when she lifted things because I have no relation to that; seeing it in the movie connects it to me, makes me understand it. I was not able to imagine the ugliness or the punishments of the headmistress to the same extent i was able to do by seeing it. I enjoyed the book and understood it, but i was not able to make the same connections.

2004-03-15T13:51:00.000-08:00

reading strategy: the method by which you process printed information, for example, if you read from the first page word for word, or if you skim the books you read, or start at the end, or if you mostly read word for word and skim.
Information: Information is substance of what you read.
Meaning: says why the information is important.
coherence:makes what you read make sense and flow togehter.

when you read you take in new information an dold information you learn. Your brain is working and being changed; your thoughts are being reordered. The difference between "constructive hyper-reading" and the reading you do for literature class, is that with the former you're more likely to scan for information and pick out key points whereas for a literature calss you're more likely to read word for word, be focused, and do less deauthorization, the writer will have somewhat more impact on how you interpret the message.

2004-03-13T16:19:00.000-08:00

I thought we were supposed to have an essay due friday about our website changes, but we didn't turn what it so i thought to be safe i'd put it on here just in case that's what we were supposed to do.
I have made several changes to the original draft of my personal/professional webpage. These changes have resulted because I have gained knowledge about how to create a webpage from such sites as Spider Pro and Sucky to Savvy. I also made changes because as I thought more about my website I got new ideas and thoughts about how I wanted it to look and what I wanted its purpose to be.
My website began with no contact info, no place for feedback, no descriptive title, and it did not clearly state its purpose. As I read the sites which explained how to make websites better I added these aspects to my wepage. In my rough draft my links were randomly lying around on the page and they had no titles; in my final draft my links are aligned to the left in their own text box adn have titles. ON my homepage I also added a description underneath my links so that my audience would better be able to navigate my site.
In my original webpage there was no consistency; each page was styled differently. In my final draft each page is set up the same and poses a question such as "How Does Technology Affect Writing," and then the title of hte paper is below that. Each page has a link back to the homepage and the other links, all which my first draft lackead. In my first draft I also planned to have links to hte sites I used in my first webpage, usch as surfing and basketball. I realized these topics had little relevance to the purpose of my website and thus needed to be deleted. My webpage is far from perfect, but it has vastly improved since its beginning.

2004-03-01T14:41:00.000-08:00

The key elements of style that I learned from Style and Elements are
clarity, coherence, concision, and usage. For the most part, Elements
only taught me about usage. It taught me that in a series of three or
more terms with a single conjunction, use a comma after each term
except the last, to form the possessive singular by adding s, and
to use a dash to set off an abrupt break or interruption and to
announce a long appositive or summary. Elements also provides a
useful section regarding misused words and expressions which are useful
for concision and clarity. Other than that, I did not learn much from
Strunk and White in regards to clarity, coherence, and concision. It
did not, as Williams analogized, show me how to swing a bat. Most of
its rules I had already heard before such as use active voice, and
be clear. It didn?t help me understand these rules any better, but
serves as a useful accompaniment to Williams text so that I can
quickly see a clear set of rules that I understand because of how
Williams explained them. Without Williams book I would not know how to
follow or apply the rules stated in Strunk and White.
Williams, on the other hand, clearly explains how I can make my
writing clear, coherent, and concise. In regards to clarity, Williams
gives guidelines for the use of nominalizations, metadiscourse, when to
choose the active or passive voice. He gives the rules: 1. The
subjects of the sentences name the cast of characters. 2. The verbs
that go with those subjects name the crucial actions that those
characters are part of. Williams explains that to achieve coherence
one should use context to determine whether to use the active or
passive voice, announce the topic at the beginning of a sentence, and
put new information at the end of a sentence, and old information at
the beginning. I learned that readers will feel that a paragraph is
cohesive if it has consistence topic strings and readers will take
the main characters of the story as the most consistently familiar
process of information, and that to be cohesive a paragraph needs
thematic strings, and related words, and that topics and themes should
be near the end of the last sentence of every issue. I also learned
that it is important for paragraphs to have points. The point is the
most importance sentence and gets across to the reader the writers main
argument for the paragraph. The point should be at the end of either
the issue or discussion. I learned reasons to put points in different
locations and that readers in nonacademic situations...want to see the
POINT up front. Williams gave excellent advise for revision to make
coherence on page 107: Track down topics and themes, delete misleading
words and terms, weave into your issue and discussion key topics and
themes.
Williams also describes how to make your writing concise. He advises
not to use the negative, and gives examples of how to turn negatives
into positive form. He says to use the fewest words possible and not
to state what your reader can easily infer. He discusses
metadiscourse and tells us how to know when to use it by providing
examples: hedges and emphatics, sequencers and tropicalizers,
attributors and narrators.
I feel that the chapter on usage was the one Chapter Williams had that
was weak in comparison to Strunk and White. I found little information
in the Chapter to be useful and I highly preferred the usage section of
rules offered by Strunk and White. I, however, did learn from
Williams: dont split infinitives; use that, not which for restrictive
clauses; use fewer, not less for countable nouns; don't use hopefully
to mean I hope. I thought he explained this rule better than Strunk
and White. I also liked the information Williams gave about how
different writers and editors enforce rules of usage.

2004-02-18T18:48:00.000-08:00

Prompt Four

After looking through several of my classmates blog postings I found I agreed with alot of what they said and saw differences in our understanding. I agree with the point Kacey makes in regards to the rule on page 19: "Make definite assertions." She discusses the example the book gives about "The Taming of the Shrew." I do not think the revised version gets across the same ideas as the "first" one does. The first version gets across tha the text is weak; it explains why the characteristics of Katherine and Bianca are important while the revised version merely shows that these charactersitics exist. I agree that most of the time you should write in positive formto be effective. There are certain instances, however, wehre the ideas will be clearer if put in negative form and is vague, and sometimes this is the writer's intent.
When Williams discusses not using the negatives he says "the negative may only imply what we should do by telling us what we shouldn't do" (130). In the example of the negative Strunk and White revised, the negative is no doing that; it can not be translated to positive form. Perhaps to improve it you could instead revise it to say: "The Taming of the Shrew," is weak in spots. Shakespeare portrays Katherine as unadmirable and Bianca as a forgetable character."
I also liked Chrissy's writing analysis: "Don't shift all the day's nutrition (or the information in prose) into a few bites (or sentences). Make the entire paper rich with important detail, like a day should be with nutrients." Useless words are a big problem in writing and will harm the effectiveness of your topic. Williams says "a reader will feel that a paragaraph is cohesive if it has other strings of related words, strings that we call thematic strings" (83). If you throw in a bunch of useless words it will lose its coherence, consistence, and it will be hard to find related words, themes, and ideas.
Another thing Chrissy talked about was the ancient writing of Phaedrus. "Writing was a major technological change in the day of the Greeks. Socrates worried about the effects writing would have on memory...Abuse occurs when anything is used." Socrates was correct about the effects of memory in more ways than one. People can often misinterpret written text. If a writer produces work that is unclear or incoherent, the reader may take away a completely different meaning than was intended. Thus, the reader will learn something or remember something "incorrectly." In verbal language, ideas are more likely to be expressed clearly and the receiver is more likely to take away the intended message. That is why style and Williams rules about style are so important, without them the reader would either misinterpret or fail to understand the text.
In Matt's blog, he said that style helped him to learn to: "Make the topics of each paragraph clear, and link one paragraph to the other." I think that information is very good, because I have always had a hard time linking from one paragraph to another. Williams says: "How we open a paragraph determines how our readers will read the rest of it, because in our opening we tell them how to frame the conceptual space that they are about to enter. To make sure they frame it in the right way, we place key thematic terms as close as we can to the end of that opening" (89). This helps me begin to understand how to link my paragraphs using topics and themes. I feel that the hardest part of learning style is that everyone has a different prelimary knowledge, and will interpret and apply it differently as well. Verbally, this happens less often. This was brought to my attention when I saw that Matt found one rule from Strunk and White elementary (possessive singular rule) while I did not know it, and a rule I found elementary (pronouns) Matt learned better after reading Strunk and White.

2004-02-16T16:25:00.000-08:00

Warm up 2-16-04

Williams and Strunk and White present the ideas associated with style differently. Strunk and White present things by giving numbered rules such as "14. Use active voice." and "15. Put statements in positive form." Strunk and White then give a few examples. Williams, however, incorporates these ideas in his explanations of how to make writing clear and coherent. He discusses passives and agents to talk about active voice and he uses such rules as "2. When appropriate make the subjects of your verbs characters involved in those actions." He uses different rules to explain how to follow one of Strunk and White's rules. It is easier to follow Strunk and White because their ideas are easier to remember, find, and quicker to read.

2004-02-15T20:49:00.000-08:00

In, "Style: Toward Clarity and Grace," Joseph M. Williams discusses the elements I wrote about concerning Strunk and White. Williams advice is more useful to a large extent. Strunk and White merely state the rules of writing, while Williams explains how to follow these rules how to be an effective writer so that you can inderstand the concepts discussed by Strunk and White.
Strunk and White advise to "use the active voice" (18). They give a few examples but do not explain "how" to write in active voice. Williams expands on this concept by instructing to "First, locate the cast of characters and the actions that those characters perform (or are the objects of). If you find that those characters perform (or are the objects of). If you find that those characters are not subjects and their actions are not verbs, revise so that they are" (23). This explains how to write in the active voice. He also advises against nominalization and gives specific rules to help make your writing active and clear; he goes into depth for pages (including how to avoid passives through the use of agents, the use of metadiscourse, etc.). He sums up how to write clearly or actively by the following rules:
"1. Express actions and conditions in specific verbs, adverbs, or adjectives [...]
2. When appropriate, make the subjects of your verb characters involved in those actions"(43).
Williams does not use specific rules so much as he gives key points while explaining how to write clearly and coherently. By giving specific rules Strunk and White disconnected how the rules all work together to achieve good writing. Williams method makes it easy to understand how to apply the rules and how they all work together. Strunk and White tell me rule 13,14,15,16, but Williams tells me how to put them together. Williams also tells me how to manage endings. He gives the advise to "shift less important information to the left [...] shift important information to the right" (69). Strunk and White don't go beyong "place the emphatic words of a sentence at the ed" (32). They tell me what to do, but not how to do it. In chapter 5 Williams thoroughly discusses topics from where to place them and how to support them. He tells how to compose a paragraph and a whole document to make them clear and coherent. He gives advise such as "Near the end of the last sentence of every issue, readers expect to find words that announce the new topics and themes that the writer will repeat in the longer segment that follows, the segement we called the discussion" (97), as well as how to make the point obvious to the reader, reasons for making the point at the end of a document, as well as advice on how to draft. Strunk and White merely give minimal direction such as "choose a sutiable design and hold to it," and "make the paragraph the unit of composition" (10). Williams also gives a deeper discussion on how to avoid wordiness, avoid writing in the negative, as well as issues related to length and elegance.
Strunk and White's text is more effective than William's text in a few areas. Strunk and White give clear and straight forward grammatical rules such as "use a dash to set off an abrupt break or interruption and to announce a long appositive or summary" (9) and "in a series of three or more terms with a single conjunction, use a comma after each form except the last" (2). Williams does not provide such grammatical rules. Without these rules I would be unable to write clearly or effectively, and the rest of the advice given by Williams would not even matter. Strunk and White also make their individual points stand out. "Express coordinate ideas in similar form" (26). If Williams discussed this I do not remember it. Thus, Strunk and White are more effective and they make the information stick out in my memory, the rules are easier to remember than the concepts given by Williams as they are less to remember and you only have to remember them in bits. Strunk and White are also more extensive in their explanations of misused words and expressions of which the provide a detailed chapter.
Overall, Williams's text is more effective. Strunk and White merely state the rules, Williams tells you "how" to follow them as well as makes it easier to understand them. Williams goes beyond the basics; his book is an amazing resource which will give you the how-to on becoming an effective and clear writer. Strunk and White are effecitve to in that they give you the basics, which are necessary to master before you can apply Williams advice in becoming a good writer.

2004-02-12T18:05:00.000-08:00

A passage in my EMU Undergraduate catalog that is an example of particularly bad writing is"
"While medical schools do not prescribe a premedical curriculum, they expect a thorough understanding of modern concepts in biology, chemistry, and physics. Most premedical students, therefore, elect a major in one of these areas, although this is not mandatory. The course requirements are similar but differ enough so that students should consult the catalogs of the schools in which they are interested. If students electing the premedicine sequence are not achieving a 2.75 grade point average, their chances of acceptance by a medical school are minimal, and they should plan their programs so that other professional or vocational goals are possible."
My revision: "It is not mandatory for premedical students to major in biology, chemistry and physics, but most do because medical schools expect a thorough understanding of these subjects. Students should consult the catalogs of the schools in which they are interested to know course requirements. Premedicine students who do not achieve a 2.75 have minimal chances of acceptance by a medical school, and should plain their programs so that they have ther career options upon graduation."
I revised these sentences according to Williams. I feel that by separating the first two sentences they separated the characters so that it was not clear that students elected these majors becuase medical schools expected them to be knowledgeable about them. I feel that it was too wordy and confusing. Williams says on page 20, "the subjects of the sentences name the cast of characters and the verbs that go with those subjects name the crucial actions those characters are part of." I feel the sentence has better clarity if it connects the medical schools expectations and the premed students course selections. I thought that the catalog version passive, and the second has a clearer "subject, verb, action." My version also allows to remove their version which includes "therefore" which Williams advises against because it is metadiscourse.The third sentence said that the schools are similar but differ; this is wordy, you only need to say that they differ to clarify why a student should consult a catalog. To add the similar only achieves confusion. Also, instead of saying, "if students electing premedicine" it is a whole lot more consice and clear to say "premedical students." It makes the sentence more active as well and is less a nominalization. You shouldn't start a sentence with an "If" because it causes it to be passive and less clear. I thought my version also shifted less important information to the left better than the first. I also think that the use of voactional and professinal goals were wordier and more abstract than career options. The first version did have good cohesion by putting new information at the end of the sentence and not extracting and isolating. The first version also used "in which" to refer to a whole clause which is advised against on page 183. The catalogs version also lacks precision.

2004-02-11T19:02:00.000-08:00

Williams is difficult to discuss because I've never talked about this sort of topic before and I am getting used to it. I am only beginning to understand what he is saying and the ideas he is talking about. Its hard to think of a topic. I have never been forced to think about this type of thing before and it is challenging.

2004-02-09T19:16:00.000-08:00

Monday Feb 8 class stuff
When Williams says telling him to be clear is like telling him to hit the ball squarely, he means it is something he already knows but doesn't understand how to do. He needs more explicit concrete directions about being clear such as having subjects go with verbs and having new ideas at the end of the sentences.
Three causes for bad writing were the Norman Conquest which brought upon the French influence upon the English language, the Renaissance which brought about a Latin and Greek influence and then later an intellectual movement replaced verbs with abstract noungs.
These three causes of bad writing are a good thing because they make English the varied language that it is today. It shaped our language and made it more flexible-we could have more words.
The quote "words are like razor blades-you use them as if they are bricks," was a quote telling the writer that he was not writing clearly, concisely and effectively.
One example of a phrase from dialect adn how you'd try to spell it is the New York dialect. They would say and spell works like York as "Yawk," talk like "tawk."

2004-02-02T18:32:00.000-08:00

Prompt one
Strunk and White's "Elements of Style," is extremely useful for me as a student and as a writer. It shows me how to write correctly and accurately express myself. It clearly displays rules of grammar. The material in this book relays how to produce work which will help me get across what I am trying to express in an effective and professional manner which will help my readers comprehend what I am saying, and take me more seriously than if I did not utilize the information presented in this book.
There were a few elements in Strunk and White which I found particularly helpful as I think about my own writing. The most helpful element was rule number 8 which says to "use a dash to set off an abrupt break or interruption adn to announce a long appositive or summary" (9). I have always been unsure of how to properly use this peice of mechanical grammar, and I now konw when it is appropriate to use: "Use a dash only when a more common mark of punctuation seems inadequate" (9). This is usually when you need "a mark of separation stronger than a comma, less formal than a colon, and more relaxed than parentheses"(9). The use of a colon is another element whcih I thought was very useful, as I have also been unclear on that as well. Actually, I am still unclear about the colon which would explain my use of it above if incorrect. I also found that the rule that "the number of the subject determines the number of the verb"(9) to be very useful. I often times have made the number of the verb to be congruent with the number of the noun which directly preceded it, and not necessarily with the subject. I now understand the rule.
There were also elements in Strunk and White which I found unuseful or wrong, at least as I think about my own writing. However, it is possible I am incorrect in these assertions. Strunk and White say that after the final consonant when forming a plural you should always add an 's, even if the preceding letter is s. "Exceptions are the possessives of ancient proper names ending in -es and -is, and such forms as for conscience' sake" (1). I always thought that if any word ended in s that you would use the form s', such as in James'. I also do not understand why conscience' is not conscience's. Another element I thought wrong was the rule that "in a series of three or more terms with a single conjunction, use a comma after each form except the last"(2). I always thought you dropped the comma before the conjunction.
Therefore, Strunk and White's, "Elements of Style," is a very useful resource. It provides information that helps me to look knowledgeable and intelligent when I produce my writing, and effectively say what I want to say. However, there are a couple rules which I think could possibly be dated, unhelpful or wrong. I also think someof the rules are not clearly explained and need to be elaborated on in order to clear up confusion.

2004-01-18T17:11:00.000-08:00

Friday Jan 16

1. In Phaedrus one issue discussed was that Plato was using writing to argue against writing. The implications of this today is that people argue against using technologies such as computers and use things like electronic print on which to place their argument; the audience which hears their argument is greatly expanded by the technology they are arguing against. Also, writing itself was a technology just as much as computers. Plato argued they disconnected the person from themselves adn they wrote not of wisdom but of remininsces. Sure, technologies may alter your thinking more than would an oral tradition, but it greatly expands the audiences you can reach and expands your knowledge by having the ability to become acquainted with information you would be unable to attain with certain technologies.
2. Ongs implications are very similar to those addressed by Plato. The two texts can be applied to each other. Ong said that computers are a technology just as writing was and thus, someone who argues against computers is in a sense hypocritical if they do not argue against writing as well. He said that writing is a technology that restructures your thought. But who says that is a bad thing? Sometimes writing can help you understand and see yoru own ideas better than just through oral narration. Eventually, just as writing was internalized, we will internalize computers; they will become a part of their expression and I don't think they will separate us from ourselves or our soul, but merely allow us to record in a sense "ourselves." Sure, writing can't talk back to your or answer questions immediately, but you can write questions and receive later responses like with AIM. Some texts allow you to respond. The only thing is you are not allowed to read facial expressions to detect lying.

2004-01-14T13:39:00.000-08:00

So for my writing style project I was thinking about putting rocks or seashells and making them form out words in a thing of water and having the water freeze. I dont know. The ice could easily melt. I'll think about it. Could always just spell something out or use like raisins or do something with fruit or something. I don't know. Maybe I'll put rocks in clay and spell out words with the rocks. I think thats my plan for the moment...it's not gross and dirty and its portable and it should stay.

2004-01-14T13:28:00.000-08:00

Jan 14 In class and Reflection

Throughout my education I have been presented with certain roles and standardizations on how to write. If you are writing a paper you are supposed to have an intro with your thesis in the last sentence, a body and a conclusion. You are supposed to set up each according to your introduction. However, sometimes I feel your thesis doesn't have to be the last sentence of your introduction. It should be in the beginning of your paper and supported in the body, but I don't think your reader needs location in order to identify your thesis; if your paper is well written the reader should be able to identify the thesis no matter its location. I feel that as long as your paper is organized some format rules can be broken. Also, in poems they break rules by not using capitalization, commas or periods. In creative writing you don't introduce what you're going to tell them and sometimes you are never direct. Sometimes run on sentences are ok; they can be grammatically correct even though standard rules urge against run ons. I feel breaking the rules depends on the situation, the audience, the kind of writing you're doing, and how well established you are in this particular field of writing.

I think that today markers of social standing largely depend upon education. For instance, high up social men might easily and casually have a conversation about the stock market and their business, etc. without batting an eye while someone not so high up the social ladder might not have a clue whats going on in the stock market, and if they do its not well invested and this can be taken from the conversation. Also, the way you talk is an important social standing tool. If you use proper English you'll probably be taken as smarter and more serious than someone who doesn't. If you can't use a computer you probably won't get a very good paying job, so thats important to have good social standing. I think that you need to know how to use a computer, speak and write effectively, and know a trade in order to have good social standing, not necessarily a college degree, but you have to have certain skills and know a trade or be educated in a certain area. It is important to develop and hone skills.

2004-01-12T11:09:00.000-08:00

Reflection on #3
I feel that my writing would be very different if I could not change it. Often times, the first time I write something, it doesn't make complete sense or is hard to follow. Therefore, alot of times my writing would not make sense and it'd have plenty of spelling errors and repeated words. I would then also not have the opportunity to expand and improve my ideas. No matter how premeditated my writing was there are certain ideas that can only come after seeing already exisiting ideas in print. I think the exercise is good to improve organization, as you would have to make it make organized the first time if you were not going to be allowed to make changes. However, as for the teachers who used to make their students use this form of writing at all times, I feel they greatly hindered their students development as writers by not allowing them to learn to edit and improve their work, to make connections, and to expand their ideas.

2004-01-12T11:02:00.000-08:00

#3
Computer aided writing is more overwhelming and constricting than using pen and paper. With a computer, sometimes the computer reads your writing slowly which limits how fast you can express your ideas. If you use a pen and paper you can write at whatever speed you want without having to wait for the computer to process your text. Also, computers can turn off and you can lose your information if you don't save it. If you write something on paper you don't have to worry about that; it's not just going to disappear. I also feel that you can better express your ideas if using paper, that it is easier to be creative. Not only this, but computer screens can hurt your eyes whereas pen and paper can not do this. I also feel that it is easier to go back and check your work on paper compared to scrolling on a sometimes reluctant computer. Also, often times when composing on your computer you have distractions such as instant messenger and the internet. Pen and paper do not provide these distractions.

2004-01-11T15:33:00.000-08:00

I have decided to transfer my written journal of ideas for my writing technology to here. My first idea was to find some bark or a rock or something and etch words into it. But, then I thought that finding a rock of decent size to etch something into it would be a painful task, and that the actual etching would be even more painful. I then envisioned the bark falling apart if I tried to etch anything into it. So, I then thought that maybe I could make a paste out of flour and water, spread it on the bark and etch words into the dried flour paste. But, after I thought about it, I didn't really want bark lying around my dorm. I mean, who knows what kind of bugs could be in that. I thought perhaps I could sketch out words in the snow and take a picture of it, but I want something that can't melt or be blown away. I could just take rocks and form words with them on the ground, but they could be kicked away, etc. I want something thats easy to see and read and won't be messy or easily destroyed.

2004-01-07T14:00:00.001-08:00

Style and technology play important roles in the way you judge and percieve people and things. If for instance a person dresses in a certain style I assume certain things about them. If I see a guy with long hair clad in tie dye and perhaps a girl wearing bell bottoms or something like that I associate them with the hippies and assume they listen to rock and are casual in many areas. On the other hand, if I see someone wearing baggy jeans, cut off gloves, a large amount of "ice" and perhaps still have the tags on their classes I consider them ghetto and assume they are at the very least slackers. Although my assumptions may often be incorrect, their particular style causes me to be judgemental. The same goes for things such as writing. If I am reading something and its style is one which uses a fairly large vocabulary, flows well together, and appears ubiased I am more likely to assume that its writer is smart and that his work is credible or at least worth reading. However, if a writer uses a style which uses a great deal of slang and goes against the norms of how things are expected to be written I will assume they are unintelligent and not credible. Also, a journalistic style will lead me to believe the writing is factual, while a narrative or prose style will lead me to assume it is made up. This spans into many areas. Technology plays a role as well. Someone who presents their work using the technologys a computer offers over someone who just uses handwritten or minimal technology will appear more professional and credible. Thus, although they can often be incorrect, style and technology leads us to assume things and and to make judgements.

2004-01-07T14:00:00.000-08:00

2004-01-07T10:42:00.000-08:00

This is my first blog entry for my English 328 class.