Outline:
I. Letter 1: To someone close to me
II. Letter 2: To someone who is less close to me
III. Letter 3: To a company or corporation
IV. Questions:
a. What happens to your voice in each case?
b. What features of your writing are altered?
Letter 1: Grandma
Grandma,
Hi, it’s Mark.
I am writing this letter to you for an assignment in class that is asking me to write a letter to someone close to me. I don’t really have anything to say, and am having a hard time with the assignment because I’m tired and have a lot of other homework also. I think I have already spent too much time trying to think about how to go about this one, and so I guess I am just winging it.
The letter is for my English class called Advanced Composition and Rhetoric. Advanced Rhetoric must have something to do with ancient rhetoric, because that is what my book is called.
The class is one of four I need for my Bachelor degree. I am taking two others, and will be taking the fourth this summer. Perhaps I already told you that. Anyway, I am expecting my degree in August, but will be going through a ceremony at the end of April, since dad decided to come, and mom might. I don’t like the idea of going through the motions of receiving a certificate, when I haven’t actually met all the requirements expected of me to get it. Oh well, I guess.
Anyway, hope things are good out your way.
Love, Mark
Letter 2: Dr. Souder
Professor Souder,
Hi, it’s Mark Psinas, from you Fall 2010 Advanced Composition and Rhetoric class. This letter is in response to rhetorical activities question 5 of chapter six, on page # 231.
I was thinking about emailing you to ask if I should include the written letters on my blog, with the two questions that are asked after writing the letters. Or, should I just answer the questions. I guess I will just put a link up with access to them, because I am running short on time and need to finish this and make time for other things I need to get done.
I was writing my grandma, and I ended up questioning the relevance of ancient rhetoric to “advanced rhetoric.” Page # 237 says comparison and description are still used today; which were used by the ancient rhetoricians. As well, I assume learning about the ones that were used often, but not so much anymore would lead to advanced learning skills involving rhetoric. So, I guess I wonder, if these statements are acceptable descriptions? And, if so, are there any rhetorics that are in use today that were not used by the ancients?
Anyway, I have a lot of stuff coming up due with school, graduation, taxes, etc., and this assignment has already taken up quite a bit of my time.
Well, I hope I get a decent grade on this.
Sincerely,
Mark Psinas
Letter 3: CSU-Pueblo
To: CSU-Pueblo
From: Mark Psinas
Regarding: Question 5 of chapter six of my Advanced Composition and Rhetoric course book, per the assignment.
Hello, this letter may appear odd to you, but it is following the guidelines of an assignment I am doing for one of four courses I am taking to get the professional writing minor added to my Bachelor degree. This letter is following two others I have written; the first to my grandma, and the second to my professor.
In the first letter, I discussed how I will be walking through the ceremony in April, but will not complete my requirements until August. I don’t really like the idea of participating in a ceremony for something that has yet to be completed. So, I question, what might this be teaching people? Have you ever had anyone walk through the ceremony and not get a degree? That has to be disappointing! Anyway, if not, I sure hope that I am not the first.
Sincerely,
Mark Psinas
Question 1: What happens to your voice in each case?
It becomes more formal. I went from writing things about myself, to writing things from the previous letter relevant to the professor, to writing things relevant to the university. I discussed with the professor issues I talked about in the first letter, and then discussed issues relevant to the university relevant to the first letter. I brought up the major points in all three letters, or tried to at least briefly mention them, and then centered the writing on issues relevant to their role. My voice went from talking about my current purpose of writing and surrounding issues of my life while involved in the writing, to a voice of less issues of my life and more questioning the purpose, to a final voice of less purpose (except for some clarity, similar to the fashions of the first two letters) and more questioning the surrounding issues (brought up in the first letter, and briefly mentioned in the second) relevant to those the third letter was written to.
Question 2: What features of your writing are altered?
The attitudinal dimensions: acceptance, indifference, and rejection.
Acceptance in the first letter was seen in just letting my grandma know what was going on, without going into much specifics. Acceptance of the second letter was in the course content itself. And acceptance of the third letter was with the clarity of purpose, and relevance involving the university.
Indifference in the first letter came with not needing to elaborate on the specifics of further details about the assignment (written about in the second letter), and about the stand of question taken in the third (the first letter being more passive). Indifference in the second letter was seen in my not bringing up the personal mentioned in the first (also an indifference in the third letter), and not bringing up the issues of the third letter (instead just mentioning them).
Also indifferent in the third letter, the second letter went into detail about the assignment and course.
Rejection was seen in not really caring much for details on issues that are irrelevant to the primary purpose of the persons influence: grandma not needing course details and requests for information already known to be outside of ones influence; Professor Souder’s not needing this same influence of request to the university, and not needing the wining-like writing present in both letters; and the university not needing the wining-like writing irrelevant to their role, nor needing the details of the second letter irrelevant to their concern.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment