Refer to Exercise 14: Respect in the community (p. 36)
(Paragraph 1: context and “big picture”; comment on the editor’s stance. Note the variety of tactics used by the editor to command respect and give an impression of authority.)
(Think about the editor’s attempt to occupy the moral high ground. Use some “moral” tone words on p. 64 and the “Sentence patterns: morals and guilt” on p. 63.)
The editor commands respect in the editorial by adopting the high moral ground and presenting their voice as a defender of community standards. They encourage people to show respect and tolerance towards each other. The fact that the editor has, pragmatically and rather condescendingly, (“the signs are obvious”), anticipated the “scuffle” between commuters is part of their ploy to display their authority based on their superior ethical standing. Referencing the recent “scuffle” the editor captures commuters’ sense of frustration at the constant intrusion into their privacy on public transport. Accordingly, the editor anticipates the public’s respect because of its insistence on their rights to decency and respect. Contrastingly, the editor depicts … those who indulge in loud and intrusive behaviour as indecent and selfish… Specifically, the reference to …. seeks to shame those who seem to refuse “to be nice” . By implying that the majority of commuters would prefer peace and quiet the editor is able to control the terms of the debate and win respect for his emphasis on an ‘extra dose of courtesy”.
(Paragraph 2: some specific details: zoom in on one or two specific strategies adopted by the editor to convey their message. For example, what comparisons do they make? (See p. 11.) How do they depict commuters? (See pp. 13 and 14.) Explain strategic word choices and their implications. )
- The editor’s reference to other international models reinforces the point that irritating noise on public transport is widespread. They encourage the transport providers to introduce effective solutions that protect people’s right to privacy. (Note: What is the purpose of the comparison?) The comparison with other states encourages commuters to be receptive to initiatives that protect their peace. The editor draws upon the comparison with Boston to highlight the shortcomings of such a scheme and to reinforce the advantages of their solution of a “quiet carriage” and exaggerating the aspects of respect and privacy. …
- (Unpack the implications of strategic/ word choices to gain “depth”. See connotations and colloquial language on pp. 17-18. ) A colloquial reference to the fact that some “don’t give a stuff” is interspersed with the editor’s formal language to specifically portray many commuters as indifferent to the needs of others. Such a depiction seeks to isolate those who disregard others, with the implication being that such people should be ashamed of their self-indulgent and exclusive behaviour.
- (Reinforce the editor’s message and their values.) Overall, the editor’s use of comparisons, colloquial terms and the depiction of commuters imply that schemes should prioritise the needs of those who show respect and tolerance towards others.
Text 2: Your Say : The noise invasion
The constant background noise in the suburbs highlights people’s lack of consideration. For example, workers come to install your solar panels. One of their biggest suitcases contains their sound system that will delight the neighbours for the day.
The fenceman can’t work without his stereo either, which competes with his power tools as he spends the day hammering in the panels. The builders down the road provide “open air radio concerts”. Even the local tennis coach often decides that it’s more fun for the youngsters to learn to play tennis to the raving beat of disco tunes.
Such workers typically insist on their own rights to make as “much noise” as they like. Then they present as justification for their noise – “no one else has complained”.
What happened to some good old- fashioned respect and courtesy in the community?
One would have thought that with so many technological listening devices available that such “concerts” would be a thing of the past. With such devices
workers could blissfully blast their own ear drums.
Radios and tape decks are banned on public transport. It’s about time they were banned on building sites and in other public places because many workers do not understand concepts such as consideration and respect towards others.
Ms Janie Smith, The Daily
(Note: Compare and contrast: compare the editor’s and Ms Smith’s views. Establish some common ground/ “big picture”/ context.)
Likewise, Ms Smith also focuses on the lack of courtesy in public places and contends that workers in outdoor places should also show respect towards others. If the editor suggests “quiet carriages” are an optimum solution, then Ms Smith uses an analogy with public transport to recommend the use of technological gadgets to protect the peace of communities. (Note: Narrower focus on specific word choices of this author’s: comment on differences.) Specifically, this author’s depiction of builders in the community as indifferent towards the needs of others is dealt with sarcastically as she highlights their tendency to provide “open air concerts”. Her intention is clearly to stimulate people’s frustration and like the editor, shames those who continue with their disrespectful ways. Her terse statement and rhetorical question imply that people’s lack of respect should not be tolerated.