Genre Analysis Essay Example for Free

Genre Analysis Essay For this rhetorical analysis I have done research on two electronics engineering documents commonly referred to as project proposals. The first project proposal that was reviewed was for Security Guard Monitoring Systems by Group Engineering Solutions (GES). The second proposal is a business-oriented document for Multi-Robot Manipulation and Maintenance for Fault-Tolerant Systems by Shanghai International Conference Center (SICC). The purpose of this rhetorical analysis is to identify various similarities and differences within the specified texts using Anne Beaufort’s (a linguist in the field of writing) five-knowledge domains: genre, subject matter, rhetoric, writing process, and discourse community. The attention of this rhetorical analysis will be mainly focused on the intended audience, context of the documents, writing structure and format, and each author’s appeal to Anne Beaufort’s rhetorical knowledge domain. The Shanghai proposal was written by an electronics engineer for viewers within several different qualifications and statuses. Apparently this proposal’s targeted audiences are people at the Shanghai Conference Center. The primary audience would consist of employees that are in the workplace genre of mechatronics and automation (MA), such as financers, operators, and managers. The second audience consists of those that may work in smaller sections of the field, such as maintenance workers, auditors, and supervisors. There are also audiences besides the primary and secondary audiences. Other potential audiences might include legislatures, product testers, and other smaller services within the field of engineering. This is evident through the description of the projects maintenance procedures. Someone has to test the machine and meetings must be held to discuss them. Unlike the Shanghai proposal the Group Solutions Engineer (GES) proposal has various audiences that don’t spread out to the same extent that Shanghai’s do. The project proposal by GES does not meet the expectations of business companies instead, their proposal meet expectations for good academics. This claim was easily identified at the beginning of text. They clearly stated that â€Å"Dr. Miguel Figueroa and Dr. Nayda G. Santiago† was receiving the proposal. Additional support to this claim was found through extended research on the two professors. The two professors are both neurologist which seemingly has nothing to do with engineering. This makes it apparent that the professors were teaching at a college or university during the proposal of this project. This also explains why they were the targeted audience (primary audience) for the proposal. The secondary audiences for the GES proposal are other university graduate students. Similar to Shanghai, the GES proposal also has a third audience except, these audiences consist of spectators and scouts. In other words, these viewers are graduate students from another university or managers out for potential employees. Moreover, Shanghai’s proposal contains several rhetorical aspects in is context. Shanghai’s proposal was obviously written in response to a company’s request for improved multi-robot systems. This demand was recognized because of the frequently used term referring to problems, errors, and system malfunctions. More specifically, they used the term â€Å"failure† more consistently than others throughout the paper. For instance, in part â€Å"a† of section five (V Multi- Robot Maintenance policy) the writer of this Shanghai proposal says â€Å"In this period†¦the failure rate of the robot is also increased. † Another aspect contained within the Shanghai proposal is on how they express time as an issue. The term â€Å"failure† also implies that there is a time limit for this project proposal. It is relevant to assume that this project proposal was in the process of being developed during the time that the multi-robot machines were failing to operate accordingly. One can also tell that demand for the proposal was growing by reading the maintenance policy section. They take previous robot failures into considerations and develop loop holes to overcome it. Although the company that the proposal was written for isn’t mentioned in the document, it is easy to see that this proposal was written in response to some company’s policy. Unlike Shanghai’s proposal, the GES proposal does express who the proposal was written in response to. GES proposal was written in response to the request of the University of Puerto Rico (title page). Another contextual aspect in which differs from Shanghai’s proposal is the time constraint that is also posed on their proposal. GES makes it easier to recognize that they are working in a timely manner. They clearly state â€Å"A work breakdown structure has been created in which all members†¦work in two variables: time and personnel† (section 1. 3). This evidence arises from the fact that the group of graduate students working on this proposal are attempting to fulfill the requirements for the project. This evidence is also apparent because of diagrams and charts used to show how much the project proposal has progressed (section 2. 6). In addition to sections 2. 6, section 2. 7 gives explicit detail, also using diagrams and charts, on the â€Å"work breakdown structure. This section displays the tasks assigned to each genre of the project such as, oral presentation, software prototype, web application, and final report. The work is divided evenly amongst the group to ensure that they have successfully completed the requirements relative to the audiences’ values which will, later on, be discussed in further detail. In addition to the contexts (frameworks) of the proposals, there are several similarities in both GES and Shanghai’s writing structures and formats. The first similarity located in the proposals is often used in writing books such as literature, political science, and algebra. Both proposals use a wide range of bold letters, titles, and numbers. They also use titled numbers or subheadings, bullets, and roman numerals. Even though these writing style are incorporated in both project proposals, GES uses titled numbers, subheadings, and bullets (even checks) more frequently than Shanghai’s proposal. Shanghai’s proposal repeatedly uses roman numerals, and subheadings with starting letters (for example; B. Robot Failure). Both seem to be an effective approach to formatting project proposals. Moreover, abbreviations are also used quite frequently throughout the proposals. Like GES, Shanghai makes an effort to use abbreviations to make it less difficult for readers to comprehend. However, their attempt in doing so has obvious flaws that can potentially puzzle the reader and shorten the number of intended audiences. For example, â€Å"Weibull distribution depicts the decreasing-failure-rate (DFR)†¦period of the bathtub curve† (section B: Robot Failure). The proposal tells what each letter in the acronym stands for, but it does not define the abbreviation as a whole whereas, GES proposal doesn’t give an explicit description of each term, but defines it completely. Another method of writing noticed within the proposals is the inclusion of references at the end. These references often consists of others documents that helped produce the current one. It is apparent that references are commonly used in any form of written documents regardless of its field or genre. Adding to the structure and formatting, both proposals present several rhetorical features relative to Anne Beaufort’s rhetorical knowledge domain (ethos, logos, and pathos). The GES proposal puts most of its efforts into establishing its credibility (ethos). In the personal biography section of their proposal they give explicit detail about their background experiences in their field of study such as, software and hardware engineering. The proposal also provides charts and graphs of estimated costs which show that they are the best team to be chosen for the project. It also shows that they are prepared for real life situations. Shanghai’s proposal does not focus the entirety of its text on ethos, because most of its audiences are professionals within their company. There is no evidence to prove their experience in the field however; the credibility that is provided in the document consists of only charts and drawings that show that they will likely have effective productivity. These graphs and charts also help the company see the approach taken to improve the systems. Moreover, both proposals take consideration in establishing logos. The charts and graphs each proposal uses to establish credibility is also used to establish logic. These charts and graphs are used to support their claim that they meet all the required policies for the completion of the project. Pathos is also used widely in Shanghai and GES proposals. As mentioned earlier both proposals are relevant to the audiences common values (end of page 3). These values are expense, time, proficiency, and development. The charts and graphs used to support the ethos and logos in each proposal are also used to support this claim. They provide a description of estimated cost, efficiency and productivity, and give a timely description of the projects progression. The wide-ranging of appeal to these values allows for each proposal to be very persuasive while passing on factual statistics. Most project proposals are done similar to Shanghai’s and Group Engineering Solutions (GES) proposals. These two documents contain several similarities and differences in their rhetorical features. Although both texts may differ in their proposal method, they both have the same goal. They were meant to convince the reader that they were the most fit group or company for the completion of the project proposal. After completing this rhetorical analysis I realize the significance in writing in the specific genre. Each project proposal reflects positively according to the necessity of the request.

Music, Truth, Profundity :: Philosophy Art Papers

Music, Truth, Profundity PART I 1. Theme One of my long-standing philosophical ‘worries’ is what I describe as a ‘cognitive dilemma’ in relation to musical communication. How can an art form which lacks a discursive element and addresses itself primarily and indeed immediately to the auditory sense, be discerned as conveying ‘truth’ or ‘profundity’? The power is amply attested — so much so that alone among the arts music occasionally figures as a ‘surrogate religion’. The pieces of this kaleidoscope — ideas culled from Schopenhauer, Langer, Jung and others — did not fall together until recently after reading Peter Kivy’s Music Alone, an account of his quest for musical profundity which ends (as he confessed) in failure, but from whose dissection of the presuppositions I gained a platform for a synthesis of my own. In this essay the key concepts of an embryonal theory are presented as a quasi ‘abstract’ of the 19K draught which comprises its first formulation. 2. Sense and Mind Kivy’s main point is that profundity must be understood as â€Å"treating a subject matter in a profound way†, i.e. discursively. Accordingly the principal means of achieving profundity are verbal, in art the tools of novelists, dramatists and poets. But musicians lack those resources; therefore, as Kivy’s analysis of Bach’s Well-tempered Clavier shows, no further yield than superb craftsmanship results — but how is this distinguishable from the craft of a Fabergà ©? These travails point to an underlying critical malaise, namely the comprehensive prejudice that reason and cognition are inherently discursive: to understand is plainly the ability to describe what one has understood. Therefore his failure to nail down musical profundity amounts to a tacit acknowledgement of the ‘ineffability’ of instrumental masterpieces — resulting in musical ‘truths’ being consigned to its sensory modality or else to a demand for marshalling verbal paraphrase for explicit decoding. My proposition is that both of these are blind alleys. Firstly, verbal analogues foster the illegitimate notion of a ‘residual language component’ (of which more infra). Secondly, sensory cortices are merely the incidental conveyances of communicative values; they are not possible sites for the germination of humanly significant meanings. Consider that speech is necessarily sound before it can be interpreted as utterance and thus belongs to the same sensory modality as music; but from this it follows that discrimination between words-as-sounds and words-as-meanings cannot be the work of the auditory cortex, but only of a mind.

Kotler Mkting Management Chapter 13

Designing and Managing Services Discussion Questions 1. How do we define and classify services? 2. How do services differ from goods? 3. How can we achieve excellence in marketing services ? 4. How can we improve service quality? 5. How can goods marketers improve customer service? Slide 2 of 29 The Nature of Services 2008 – 2018 Loss of 1. 2 million jobs 2008 – 2018 Gain of 14. 6 million jobs Slide 3 of 29 Service An act or performance one party can offer to another that is mostly intangible and does not result in the ownership of anything. Slide 4 of 29 Categories of Service Mix Mix of goods & services Pure Tangible Good Hybrid Pure ServiceSoap Cell phone Babysitting Slide 5 of 29 Service Characteristics Intangibility Variability Perishability Empty seats Inseparability Slide 6 of 29 Intangibility Create tangible elements †¢ Place †¢ People †¢ Equipment †¢ Communication material †¢ Symbols †¢ Price Slide 7 of 29 Inseparability Work Faster Add More Service Providers Work with Larger Groups Slide 8 of 29 Variability Offer Guarantees Monitor Satisfaction Good Hiring and Training Slide 9 of 29 Overnight Hotel Stay Blueprint Slide 10 of 29 Perishability Empty seats Nonpeak Demand Complementary Services Reservation Systems Differential Pricing Slide 11 of 29 New Services RealitiesCustomer Empowerment Satisfying Employees Customer Co-production Slide 12 of 29 Root Cause of Customer Failure Slide 13 of 29 What Customers Want from Providers Knowledgeable employees Address needs on first contact Treat me like a valued customer 65% 64% 62% 54% 49% 49% 45% 43% 38% Demonstrates desire to meet my needs Can quickly access information Good value for the money Courteous employees Is a company/brand I can trust Treats me fairly Provides relevant/personalized service 0% 10% 20% 30% 31% 40% 50% 60% 70% Slide 14 of 29 Determinants of Service Quality Reliability Tangibles Responsive Empathy Assurance Slide 15 of 29

SLSS Court Observation Report - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 5 Words: 1435 Downloads: 1 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Law Essay Did you like this example? SLSS Court Observation Report The courtroom is a ritualized space, involving costume, language, spatial organization and so on, and courts, therefore, constitute performative exercises of power. Discuss and analyse some of the ways in which courts demonstrate power and/or power relations. Introduction When it comes to the law, it is often related to social order and justice. In order to enforce the law, some people are given legal power. The courtroom is a place where the use of power is clearly demonstrated. As different courtroom actors play different roles, power is not equally distributed among them. Besides, due to the long history of our legal system, the court is a ritualised space involving a lot of traditional elements and all these elements symbolise power. For example, the judge’s bench is always at a particularly higher level, meaning that the judge holds the ultimate authority. Behind the judge’s bench is the coat of arms of Australia, which symbolises that the judge is appointed to represent the Commonwealth. Therefore, it is not difficult to discover the presence of power disparity if we spend some time observing in a courtroom. Using participant observation as the basic method of gathering data, this article aims to analyse the operations of the court and the power relations between courtroom actors in a courtroom, and to discover whether justice is really served by the court. The observation of court proceedings is carried out in the Local Courts on Levels 4 and 5, Sydney Downing Centre. Judges and Sentencing In accordance with Smith and Natalier (2005: 121), traditional legal concept suggests that judges’ and magistrates’ responsibility is to apply legal principles in a rational and objective way; each party tells their own story, and then the judge, or the jury (if applicable) determines which version is true, on the basis of evidence. Whilst in most of the ‘dailyâ₠¬â„¢ criminal cases there are no juries, such that the outcome of a case is solely the judge’s decision. While we may think that evidences always reveal the truth, in some circumstances there are not any solid evidences such as seized exhibits and surveillance camera recordings, nor any third person individuals who have witnessed the happening of the crime. The whole case simply relies on the statements provided by parties involved, or the testimony of the victim in the crime. As a consequence, the judge has control over the outcome of the case to a very large extent. During the observation in Sydney Downing Centre Local Courts, there were quite a number of cases of this kind. In one of them, the only evidence was a self incriminating statement made to the police by the defendant, in which the defendant admitted that he had committed the crime. The defense counsel, however, claimed that the statement was made under duress and sustained pressure, and therefore he asked for the exclusion of such evidence. The magistrate ruled in favour of the defendant after the ‘voir dire’ procedure. From the above, it is observed that while judges exercise their greatest power in deciding whether the prosecution’s or the defendant’s version is true, many factors are taken into account in order to protect the rights of the accused. On the other hand, there are exceptional cases. In another court proceeding observed, the magistrate suggested that the defendant’s statement was highly unreliable, and he pointed an accusing finger at the defendant saying that: ‘You know what you did.’ The defendant even nodded her head. But what comes as a surprise was that the defendant was found not guilty because the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. This example illustrates the idea of presumption of innocence, and questions whether defendants’ interests can sometimes be overprotected. Knowing that the defendant must have committed a crime, the judge does not necessarily have enough power to convict him/her. After all, the power to prove the case beyond doubt lies on the prosecution’s side, and it is the prosecution’s responsibility to make clarifications on the doubt. Otherwise, the benefit of doubt goes to the defendant. Sentencing is also a way that judges demonstrate their power. With reference to Smith and Natalier (2005: 129), judges have to consider many factors including the seriousness of the offence, previous criminal record of the defendant, the range of penalties applicable, harm caused to the victim, and recent court decisions of similar offences. As observed in the courtroom, the penalties are always similar for cases of the same nature, and magistrates often prefer to obtain assessment reports from probation and parole officers to see if community service orders would be a suitable alternative. It is also noteworthy that a 25% discount of the pe nalty is usually awarded for a defendant entering a guilty plea, as an incentive for the defendant to face the consequence of wrongdoing. Thus, it is shown that judges tend to achieve restorative justice, and they decide appropriate sentences in the aim to reduce the risk of re-offending. Courtroom Languages Language is always a form of demonstrating one’s professional knowledge, while knowledge is related to power. Power relationships can be easily observed by looking into the use of language in the courtroom. The hierarchy of power is most explicitly displayed when lawyers refer to magistrates as ‘Your Honour’ or ‘Your Worship’. A magistrate in the Downing Centre courtroom seemed to notice this, and she called the defense counsel ‘mate’. However, for a defendant, the use of legal language can be distressing. They are often needed to synchronise their answers and stances, in a way far removed from the conventions of everyday co mmunications of ordinary people (Carlen, 1976: 51). During the observation, a defendant entered a guilty plea for a minor offence, but he refused to admit the brief facts. The magistrate told him: ‘If you would like to go for a guilty plea, you must agree to the facts, as they are the essence of the charge’. The defendant explained: ‘I plead guilty just because I don’t want to cause any more trouble’. The magistrate said: ‘But if you don’t admit the facts, we will treat this as not guilty’. The defendant looked confused, said: ‘I agree’. As suggested by Carlen (1976: 54), this demonstrates the way that court proceedings proceed, regardless of the fact that many people are actually unable to understand what is going on, and to participate in what is going on. As a result, it is barely surprising that many defendants feel helpless in the court, especially when they do not have a lawyer representing them. Power is als o displayed when courtroom actors are eliciting information from witnesses. Witnesses are required to answer in response to the particular question, and they are not allowed to suggest other things which they believe to be important (Smith and Natalier, 2005: 129). During the observation, a witness was testifying and he got unamused when he was asked a series of short questions related to the identification of the defendant, such as ‘how far were you apart from the defendant when you spotted him at the scene?’. The witness asked ‘Is this important?’ and he got rebuked. Questions are usually asked by courtroom actors in a more direct way during cross-examination, but they can be irritating when one side is putting its case to the other side’s. In the trial hearings observed, witnesses are always asked manipulative questions like ‘I put it to you that you have been lying to us, do you agree with that?’, while they are only allowed to simpl y answer either ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ but not to give explanations. This can be unfair as witnesses are not given any chance to further clarify on false accusations. Conclusion After the observation on court judgement and sentencing procedures, it is acknowledged that judges and magistrates try their very best to achieve justice by carefully exercising their supreme power. The principle of procedural due process is especially remarkable in promoting fairness, despite that there are some limitations in serving justice. Be that as it may, it is undeniable that uneven power distribution often exists in a courtroom. While legal representatives hold certain power, defendants and witnesses have no say. Being unfamiliar with the complex rules and procedures, these non-legal representatives sometimes do not even understand what is going on in the courtroom. All in all, it remains questionable whether the way that court proceedings are carried out can really accommoda te fair treatment for the powerless. References 1.Carlen, P. 1976. The Staging of Magistrates Justice. British Journal of Criminology. 16(1): 48-55. 2.Smith, P. and Natalier, K. 2005. Understanding Criminal Justice: Sociological Perspectives. London: Sage. Page 1 Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "SLSS Court Observation Report" essay for you Create order