Search results for 'tag:Conversations tag:Hyperboles' matching tags 'Conversations' and 'Hyperboles'

English essay - Please help!

Anonymous — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 02:42:34 GMT

HI!

I Have just finished a analytical essay, and i would be really glad if someone out there could help me correcting it! It would mean a lot! Thanks! ( My essay below)

The first edition of the short story âThe Tell-Tale Heartâ was first released in 1843. This was the start of a new time epoch, which took effect in appliance to creative writing world wide. The short story triggered a big debate in the US at that time and caused a great stir.

Approximately 50 years later, another astonishing short story was published in one of the USâs biggest newspapers. This was written by Charlotte Perkins Gillman 1899. Those two short stories appeared to be quite similar in several ways. Both fall under the genre of horror and include a main character suffering from psychological disorders. The authors are using different techniques as repetition, and symbolism to create suspenseful and informative content in the stories. These techniques are waking the curiosity up inside you, which makes the readers just want continue read the story to its very end. But what are really the similarity and differences in these two stories? How do they effect the impression of the readers? Well, letâs find out!

In The Yellow Wallpaper, Charlotte Gilman is delivering her story through a mentally ill woman, in similarity to Edgar Allan Poeâs short story âThe Tell-Tail Heartâ. They are both using this technique to create insecurity to the readers which is a good twist in a short story. This type of twist makes the readers perplexed since they canât really trust the narrator completely.

One difference between those two stories is that in âThe Tell-Tail Heartâ it is clear from the beginning that the protagonist has some mental problems, while it is a almost impossible to tell that the protagonist, the main character, suffer from mental diseases in âThe Yellow Wallpaperâ. This has a greatly effect on both of the story since Perkins Gillmanâs story is harder to interpret in the beginning, which of course makes the whole story very interesting. Especially to experience the protagonists turn from being an ordinary woman who appear to be normal, to be a total freak, as you can se in the end of the story when she is crawling on the floor. The fact that we already from the beginning knows that the man in âThe tell ale heartâ suffer from mental disease tells us that something cruel is to be expected. One other interesting thing in Poeâs story is that he uses an excellent way of telling the story through a madmanâs perspective. It is almost as if the man is having a conversation with the reader, and as he is telling the story right then directly to the reader. That makes the readers feel involved in the story.

In the very first sentence, the madman is actually asking a question to the readers; ââ¦but why WILL you say that I am mad?â. Charlotte, on the other hand, has written the story as in a diary, which means that we just get to know what the protagonist wants us to know. She can therefore easily leave out important facts and happenings that happens somewhere between her diary entries. As a result of the diary structure of the story, âThe yellow wallpaper â encloses more detailed descriptions than âThe Tell-Tail Hartâ does, which is more focusing on the mans obsession.

Charlotte Perkins Gillman is using a lot of metaphorical language and symbolism in her short story. For example, she is using the yellow wallpaper to describe and symbolizes her own situation and the woman behinds it as herself. The wallpaper is almost like a mirror that is reflecting her own life. She is also using small metaphorical descriptions as for example when she is describing the yellow painted walls in the room she is living in. The yellow color on the wallpaper is describing minority, infancy and oppression. This metaphorical language creates suspense and gives us more information of her angle of approach of her mental condition. The fact that both authors chose to write their stories in first person perspective greatly impacted in the suspense of the story. It makes the stories more exhilarating and unexpected. The theme of those two stories is also separating from each other. The theme in âThe tell ale heartâ can be seen as âyour fear of being caught can actually lead to the direct oppositeâ, while the theme in âThe Yellow Wallpaper" discusses that the theme of the treatment of a mentally ill patients and the vision of a woman at that time, should be changed. Also that the treatment they used destroys patients instead of getting them better.

Charlotte Perkins Gillman uses irony to create a concealed moral. The insane woman in the story writes in her journal (which also is the story) âJohn laughs at me, of course, but one expects that in marriage.â. That is a perfect stereotype sentence of irony in the story. The woman uses irony to say something with a hidden message. The hidden message in this case is that a husband that laughs at his wife is not to except in a good relationship. Also her husband is not a pleasant and caring husband, even if she is telling the exact opposite in the written text. Edgar Allan Poe, on the other hand, are using repetitions to emphasize all those creepy occurrence that the protagonist committing, for example when he is talking about his nervousness as in the subsequent quote. âTRUE! Nervous, very, very dreadfully nervousâ¦â.

Poe is also using repetitions to create more tension to the story and also to show that the protagonist is definitely out of his mind since all those small repetitions are showing the readers how pretentious and accurate this man seams to be, which I already in the beginning started to suspect that something wrong with this man. Poe is also using sound patterning a several time to emphasize and to illustrate the things he is doing. An example of this is when he hears the unbearable noise in his head, âIt was A LOW, DULL, QUICK SOUND -- MUCH SUCH A SOUND AS A WATCH MAKES WHEN ENVELOPED IN COTTONâ. The man really describes the sound carefully and emphasize it with writing the most important part of the sentence in capitals.

On more differences between those to stories are the time perspective. âThe Yellow Wallpaperâ occurs during a few months while âThe Tell-Tail Heartâ occurs under just a several days.

Edgar Allan Poe is even using a small piece of hyperbole in his story, for example when he found the old mans âvulture eyeâ, as a reason to take the old manâs life.

Charlotte Perkins Gillman is also using the main character, the insane woman, as a symbol for innocent and actually also as a symbol for herself. It is legible that Gillman is trying to bring out this woman as a victim for her husbands treatment, - she is just doing as he tells her, which I definitely not blame her for.

Both Charlotte Perkins Gillman and Edgar Allan Poe are accordingly using mentally ill main character, Metaphorical language, symbolism to create an anxiously and suspenseful atmosphere from the very beginning to the very end of their controversial piece of art. Even though, the stories are very individual and different from each other in many ways, as I mentioned earlier in this essay.

This are just two made up stories, (even if some people consider âThe Yellow Wallpaperâ as a story of Charlotte Perkins Gillmanâs own life and experiences) written a long time ago, but events like this could still actually take place since there has and always going to be mentally ill persons that are capable to do almost everything for actually no reason. Even if the treatment of a mentally ill persons has changed a lot since 1899 (the time when âThe Yellow Wallpaperâ was written) wrong treatment of patients still exists due to ignorance. So the relevance that this kind of happening actually could take place is terrifying big.

Re: a question on double possessives and one on the other

Mister Micawber — Sat, 20 May 2006 06:59:04 GMT

I guess you don't get out much, Anon. Here is a sampling of respectable online sources. Doing a bit of Google research yourself will turn up many, many more.

The American Heritage Dictionary:

Grammarians have sometimes objected to the so-called double genitive construction, as in a friend of my father's; a book of mine. But the construction has been used in English since the 14th century and serves a useful purpose. It can help sort out ambiguous phrases like Bob's photograph, which could refer either to a photograph of Bob (that is, revealing Bob's image) or to one in Bob's possession. A photograph of Bob's, can only be a photo that Bob has in his possession, which may or may not show Bob's image. Moreover, in some sentences the double genitive offers the only way to express what is meant. There is no substitute for it in a sentence such as That's the only friend of yours that I've ever met, since sentences such as That's your only friend that I've ever met and That's your only friend, whom I've ever met are awkward or inaccurate.

The Columbia Guide to Standard AmE:

Although English has long and happily employed the double genitive, as in That lawnmower of Eleanorâs works fine, this construction, which wraps both the periphrastic genitive with of and the inflected genitive with the apostrophe plus s around Eleanor to make possession double, is now limited to our Informal and Semiformal writing and to the lowest levels of our speech, if we use it at all. Once again eighteenth-century argument (that one genitive is enough, and two are improper) has at least partly won out over exuberance, hyperbole, and redundancy. But only partly. A good many of us do use some double genitives and do not notice that they are double. Some language liberals argue that in Informal and Casual contexts the double genitive is idiomatic and not overkill, but few editors of Standard English will be likely to let it stand in Formal writing. Itâs either friends of my sister or my sisterâs friends; even in conversation, friends of my sisterâs may grate harshly on some puristsâ ears.

Random House:

The construction where a word is marked by two possessive indicators, the word of and a possessive case ('s) or possessive pronoun, has been in the language for at least six centuries and has been a subject of grammatical discussion for the last two. This construction is known by various names, including the double possessive, the double genitive, the appositional of-phrase, and the post-genitive.

The main thing to remember here is that this "problem" is of almost purely theoretical interest. No native speaker of the language has any difficulty understanding what "I borrowed a book of John's" means.

The genitive has several different functions in English, one of which is to indicate possession. Thus, John's picture can mean 'a picture that John owns'. However, the genitive can also indicate other associations, so that as an objective genitive, John's picture means 'a picture representing John; John's portrait'. This ambiguity is one reason the double possessive is used: it allows speakers of idiomatic English to make the distinction between "a picture of John" (that is, a portrait of John) and "a picture of John's" (a picture owned by John). Though your example, with "nephew," can work with or without the 's, the "picture" example has a distinct meaning each way.

We can also note that double possessives with possessive pronouns (rather than 's possessives) cannot be written any other way: You can say "a nephew of John" rather than "a nephew of John's," but if you start with "a nephew of his" you're stuck; it is completely unidiomatic to say "a nephew of him" (though of course "his nephew" is a possibility).

Grammarians who study the double possessive have made some useful observations. The first noun is almost always indefinite ("a picture of John's," but not "the picture of John's"; "friends of ours" but not "the friends of ours" or any other specifier). The second noun is human (or otherwise animate) and definite ("an admirer of hers" is possible, but "an admirer of the furniture's" is unidiomatic; "of Jane's" but not "of a woman's").

The combination of indefiniteness and definiteness is not possible with other constructions: rewriting "friends of ours" into "our friends" makes "friends" definite, for example. In your case, "John's nephew" means 'a specific nephew of John's', which is different from "a nephew of John's," which means 'any nephew of John's'. As former Oxford English Dictionary editor Robert Burchfield observes, "It is not easy to explain why such constructions are idiomatic: one can only assert that they are."

As noted, the double possessive goes back a long way: Chaucer has "A friend of his that called was Pandare" in the fourteenth century. The phenomenon started to get attention with the eighteenth-century grammarians, who generally disapproved of English constructions that were not possible according to the rules of Latin grammar. Some of these grammarians disapproved of the construction, while others were ambivalent.

Among contemporary language writers, most mention the construction but few criticize it; some restrict it to informal use, while others call it "needed."

The Observer:

An editor asked me which of these constructions is correct: a friend of John's or a friend of John. It is idiomatic in standard English to say or write a friend of John's. I explained that we use a possessive pronoun in this construction: He is a friend of mine. I am a friend of his. Therefore, when we use a person's name in this "of" construction, we make it possessive.

This construction is often called a double possessive, but it also is called a double genitive. "The Writer's Digest Grammar Desk Reference" and "The Gregg Reference Manual" point out that the use of the double genitive can avert misunderstanding. A painting of Jennifer shows Jennifer, but a painting of Jennifer's belongs to Jennifer.

"Working With Words" cautions that the double possessive is used only to refer to people, not inanimate objects: Joan is a friend of Tina's, but not Joan is a fan of the show's. That should be Joan is a fan of the show.

Chicago Manual of Style:

Q. A friend of John or a friend of Johnâs? Iâve heard that both are correct. A friend tossed the famous ambiguity at me this way: âA student of Einstein.â Unless itâs Einsteinâs, then it might be taken to mean a student who is working on Einstein.

A. It is best, and, what is more, perfectly idiomatic, to use the double genitive when âone of So-and-soâsâ is what you have in mind:

a student of his (that is, one of his students)

a student of Einsteinâs (that is, one of Einsteinâs students)

Then you have the liberty of writing âa student of Einsteinâ to mean by contrast either someone who is working on the great theoretical physicist as a scholarly subject or, more broadly, someone who is a close observer of Einstein and his work.

Fowlerâs notes in its third edition that such phrases as âa student of hisâ are illogicalâone of the âfreaks of idiomâ (pp. 542â43). In any case, your friendâs âstudent of Einsteinâ example is an excellent refutation of those who would avoid the apostrophe s at all costs.

COMMENTARY: My Last Duchess by Robert Browning

Anonymous — Sun, 23 Apr 2006 20:46:38 GMT

Hello,
I have just finished my commentary on "My Last Duchess" for my 11th Grade IB English class. We were supposed to talk about the poetic form, background and use of poetic devices. I would love any feed back I could get on sentence structure, choice of words, and content. (and any other mistakes) MrP I would love any feedback you could give me because after readinbg this thread, you seem to know more about this poem than anyone.

My Last Duchess

Robert Browning wrote this Dramatic Monologue in1842 and published it with a collection entitled âDramatic Lyricsâ the same year. The poem is set during the Italian Renaissance which Browning exemplifies with his references to art as well as the fiancÃ©eâs dowry. Throughout the poem, we piece together the character of the Duke and his previous wife, his âLast Duchess.â The title alone gives us an idea of how the Duke feels about women. The word âMy,â conveys his feelings of ownership and superiority towards his last Duchess and towards all women in general. The word âLastâ implies that he sequentially marries his wives and probably views them as a part of a collection rather than a partner. Browning effectively uses Dramatic Irony by allowing the Duke to unknowingly reveal his faults to the reader.

The poem is written in Iambic Pentameter and maintains an even beat throughout. Browning also uses Rhymed Couplets where every two lines end with a rhyming word. We learn that the Duke is talking to a representative from his fiancÃ©eâs family, this conversational technique makes the reader feel as if they are listening in on the conversation. In lines seventeen to nineteen, the Duke begins to talk about his previous wifeâs faults. (according to him) In these lines, Browning cleverly uses personification, by giving the paint (or perhaps the painting) human qualities. There is also a metaphor; the painting symbolizes the memories he has of his last Duchess. In line nineteen, he uses hyperbole by exaggerating the fact that the paint could not reproduce the bad qualities he remembers about his last Duchess. Lines forty-five and forty-six âI gave commands; Then all smiles stopped together.â seem to suggest that the Duke had something to do with the death of his last Duchess. However, there has been some debate as to weather or not she was actually dead at the time.

What is strikingly ironic is the fact that even after the wife is gone and rid of the Duke, he still views her as a possession through his painting. In the first line, âThat's my last Duchess painted on the wallâ he is still referring to a possession. âThatâ reduces her to nothing more than a simple object, a painting on his wall. The Dukes criticism of his last Duchess in lines sixteen through fifty-one are potentially the most ironic. All of the faults that the Duke is referring to are actually qualities that one should find appealing in a wife. Character traits such as courtesy, modesty, and compassion are all trivialized and diluted by the Duke. Browningâs use of Irony throughout the poem furthers the readerâs feelings of sympathy for the last Duchess.

Re: Plural Nouns without Quantifiers

aruzinsky — Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:03:20 GMT

Roro, thank you for your time.

Hello, and thank you for your question, Professor Ruzinsky!

I am not a professor. That title is reserved for high ranking teachers at universities which I am not. In the USA, a Ph.D. carries a title of "Dr." but I prefer that you simply call me by my registered name, "aruzinsky."

Could you read the document? Unfortunately I couldn't. File was broken and now there's an indication: it's being repaired. Are the following question concern the content of this document?

I had no problem reading the aforementioned PDF file with Adobe Acrobat Reader version 4.0. Yes, the question ... But, because I cannot paste selections from a PDF, I had to alter the symbolism during transcription.

I'd say that this usage of [Bare Plural ] introduces some category into a conversation.

Please, define "category." I suspect that you are using it in some sense for which it is not defined in my dictionary.

Please bear in mind that what we can do is to classify usages and to give them logical forms.

How do linguists put hyperbole into logical form? It seems to me that bare plurals are often used as hyperbole, e.g., with "Smokers are rude.", the intent can be to get the receiver to infer "All smokers are rude." as part of an exaggeration.

Re: Prescriptive Grammar - Centuries of Error

CalifJim — Mon, 07 Feb 2005 17:40:22 GMT

Hi, MountainHiker,

I think the listening to English all day was just hyperbole. I think Julie's main point was that there is a difference between learning to use a language and learning to quote theories about language.

As for the monkeys, I agree. At least you probably wouldn't want to have a long conversation with any of them that I have to work with every day!

Anyway, monkeys don't have the necessary brain power to acquire language, so I'm not sure that's an apt comparison. Shall we say that the monkeys thing is also hyperbole?

Best regards,
Jim

Re: There are phrase mean......

Mister Micawber — Sat, 15 Jan 2005 13:21:33 GMT

Hi Jeter,

(1) book talk: an event, usually scheduled in a library, bookstore, or educational institution, at which the author, a librarian, or other interested person discusses a book and reads excerpts from it to encourage readership and promote reading in general. Also spelled booktalk.

Or it may mean a conversation laced with literary allusions.

(2) tall talk: the act or an instance of exaggerating: exaggeration, hyperbole, hyperbolism, overstatement.

Re: A bit of

MrPedantic — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 23:34:55 GMT

Hello Candy

It should really be:

'I couldn't agree with you more!' â i.e. 'I agree with you so much, there is no possibility that I could agree with you more!'

(The opposite is: 'I couldn't agree with you less!')

I would say it's 'hyperbole', rather than understatement.

However (there is always a 'however'), the phrase could conceivably be used in an ironic way:

'I couldn't agree with you more [than I do, and I don't agree with you at all, because you're wrong]!'

Maybe your 'other' teachers were thinking of this possibility.

Sometimes BrE speakers use 'I couldn't agree with you more' to put an end to a conversation they don't wish to continue. In these cases, though, it's simply a ruse: 'I'm pretending I agree with you, because I can't be bothered to argue'. Both parties usually know that the 'agreement' isn't genuine...

MrP

Re: My Last Duchess by Robert Browning

MrPedantic — Thu, 11 Nov 2004 01:26:09 GMT

Friday. That's quite soon, Parsa. We'll see what we can do.

Quick intro. This = a dramatic monologue. You are being spoken
to by the Duke.

Techie stuff: it's written in heroic couplets with
almost continuous enjambement. (What does this mean, in terms
of the style of the poem? What effect does it have on the
rhythm?)
[Enjambement = when the lines run over the line breaks. This gives a conversational effect.]

(1) Who are 'you', the person the duke is speaking to? (Look at the last few lines.)
(2) The first 4 words in this poem are the most important. Use these
as a key to the rest.

'That's' - what does this tell you about the style of the poem? What
does the speaker do as he says 'That's'?
['That's' is another conversational effect.]

'My' - what does this tell you about the duke's attitude to his wife?

'Last' - what does this tell you about the duke's way of life?

'Duchess' - what would you expect a duchess to be like? How does
that compare with the 'duchess' you see in the poem? Why is there
a discrepancy?
[What do you think the difference in rank was, between the duke and his last wife? Why do you think he married her?]

I've marked some parts in bold. See if you can work out
why they're important and how they relate to your list of things to
look for. I've also divided the poem up into sections. Each section
marks a change in direction. Each change in direction marks a
psychological step on the speaker's part. Browning is gradually
rotating the duke in front of you.

1That's my last Duchess painted on the wall,
2Looking as if she were alive. I call
3That piece a wonder, now:
[Not personification. Look up 'pathetic fallacy'.]

FrÃ Pandolf's hands [Fra P. is imaginary]
4Worked busily a day, and there she stands.
[Google on 'FrÃ '. Look at the dates. That gives you a clue as to when the poem is set. Browning wrote some other poems about real painters with 'FrÃ ' in their names. Finding out about these may help]

5Will 't please you sit and look at her? I said
6"FrÃ Pandolf" by design, for never read
7Strangers like you that pictured countenance,
8The depth and passion of its earnest glance,
9But to myself they turned (since none puts by
10The curtain I have drawn for you, but I)
11And seemed as they would ask me, if they durst,
12How such a glance came there; so, not the first
13Are you to turn and ask thus.

[Do you notice anything about the duke's comment? What
question on 'your' part is he responding to?]

Sir, 'twas not
14Her husband's presence only, called that spot
15Of joy into the Duchess' cheek: perhaps
16FrÃ Pandolf chanced to say, "Her mantle laps
17Over my Lady's wrist too much," or "Paint
18Must never hope to reproduce the faint
19Half-flush that dies along her throat";
[This quote gives you at least four poetic devices: metaphor, personification, hyperbole, alliteration.]

such stuff
20Was courtesy, she thought, and cause enough
21For calling up that spot of joy.

She had
22A heart . . . how shall I say? . . . too soon made glad,
23Too easily impressed; she liked whate'er
24She looked on, and her looks went everywhere.

[What has happened here? How did we get from 'perhaps'
in line 15 to 'her looks went everywhere'?]
[Note that the duke began by hypothesizing how the conversation went between Fra P. and his wife. But now he's somehow moved on to what really happened.]

25Sir, 'twas all one! My favour at her breast,
26The dropping of the daylight in the West,
27The bough of cherries some officious fool
28Broke in the orchard for her, the white mule
29She rode with round the terrace
[Riding the mule gives you a clue as to her social status.]

--all and each
30Would draw from her alike the approving speech,
31Or blush, at least.

She thanked men,--good; but thanked
32Somehow . . . I know not how . . . as if she ranked
33My gift of a nine-hundred-years-old name
34With anybody's gift. Who'd stoop to blame
35This sort of trifling? Even had you skill
36In speech--(which I have not)--to make your will
37Quite clear to such an one, and say, "Just this
38Or that in you disgusts me; here you miss,
39Or there exceed the mark"--and if she let
40Herself be lessoned so, nor plainly set
41Her wits to yours, forsooth, and made excuse,
42--E'en then would be some stooping; and I chuse [= choose]
43Never to stoop.

Oh, sir, she smiled, no doubt,
44Whene'er I passed her; but who passed without
45Much the same smile? This grew; I gave commands;
46Then all smiles stopped together.
[Look up euphemism...]

[What does he mean? (Think 'The Godfather'.)]

There she stands
47As if alive. Will 't please you rise?

We'll meet
48The company below, then. I repeat,
49The Count your Master's known munificence
50Is ample warrant that no just pretence
51Of mine for dowry will be disallowed;
52Though his fair daughter's self, as I avowed
53At starting, is my object.

['Object'? How many meanings does 'object' have, in this poem?]

Nay, we'll go
54Together down, Sir! Notice Neptune, though,
55Taming a sea-horse, thought a rarity,
56Which Claus of Innsbruck cast in bronze for me.

These from your list should be fairly easy to find:

Rhyme scheme = ?
alliteration - give an example.
metaphor - ditto
assonance - ditto
simile - ditto
symbolism - ditto
hyperbole - ditto
irony - ditto
euphemism [note spelling] - ditto
allusion - there's a special kind of allusion in this poem. What is it?
(Think Pandolf.)
tone - where does tone change most significantly?

If you want me to check your answers to any of the above, post 'em up.

Good luck.

MrP