Paper #3 Question #1 Part A+B

Question 1 Part (A) : 


Dear Mrs. Fawlty,

I stayed at your torquay hotel recently and I do have to say I did not enjoy my stay. I am writing to you because I do believe I deserve a refund for my terrible experience. For starters,  when I paid for my room I expected a beautiful view of the torquay. But I did in fact not get that view I promised. I could not see the torquay from my rooms view even if I used a telescope.  I also have to say,  the bath that I was given should not even be considered a bath. If the bath is  not big enough for a tiny mouse  then it is certainly not big enough to be called a bath. Furthermore, your rooms are cold. I do not expect to stay in a freezing cold room. That also has a broken radio.   I do expect some sort of refund.

Sincerely,
Mrs.Richards


Question 1 Part(B):

Mrs.Richards and Mr. Basil's transaction in this transcript  seems like they are not getting along. Mr.Basil seems done with Mrs. Richards  and with her shenanigans.  Mr.Basil stresses his words when talking to her because he is annoyed and it clearly shows.  He stresses  the phrase "there is your bath" in the beginning part of their transaction by the words being underlined. He stresses these words for emphasis  but Mrs. Richards clearly disagrees with his statement. The reason I say this is because she stated that "it is not big enough to drown a mouse" when talking about her tub. You can clearly tell that Mrs.Richards is eccentric and only wants the biggest and the best things possible. You can also tell that  Mrs.Richards is spoiled. The reason I say this is because she wants a refund for her perfectly good room because she did not get what she wanted and what she expected. Mrs. Richards expected a bigger bath and a perfect view of the torquay or seaside. Mrs.Richards, if I had to say grew up in the rich side of the world and when she does not get the view she wanted and the bath she expected then she complains. Mrs.Richards states "it is not good enough" when talking about her view from the window. This is an example of my previous statement of Mrs. Richards being spoiled and expecting big and better things. 

There is also micro-pauses used during this transaction by both parties of this transaction to contribute to the tone of their interaction. Mr.Basil uses them to  be sarcastic. He uses verbal pause when Mrs.Richards and him are fighting about the view. He uses them when he looks out the window to see if the view is really a view. Mr.Basil says "(.)Yes(.)Yes(.) this is it."  He uses these micro-pauses for emphasis and use them for dramatic and sarcastic effect. Mr.Basil using these micro pauses shows even more that he is annoyed by  Mrs. Richards. Mrs.Richards also use micro-pauses as verbal fillers. She use them as a way to show the person she is interacting with that she plans to continue her train of thought. She uses them also as way to list things off to Mr.Basil. For example, she use them at the end of the transcript when she is listing things that are wrong or she disagrees with in or with the room. She states, "cold(.)the view is invisible(.)."  Micro-pauses are used to symbolize thinking time.  So, she is pausing in between her thoughts because she is thinking of things that are wrong with the room off the top of her head.  Overlaps are also used during this transaction between Mr.Basil and Mrs.Richards. They are using overlaps to symbolize when they are talking over or interrupting each other when they are talking. These overlaps are not cooperative overlaps. These overlaps are competitive overlaps. Each party of the interaction are using overlaps to interrupt each other. 

It is hard to compare written language with speech. But, there are some similarities between them and how they get their point across. In my part A I had to write a complaint like I was Mrs.Richards. In the transcript of their verbal  interaction they used micro-pauses to symbolize either verbal pauses or just pauses in their speech to make an effect. But written language can also have micro-pauses like in speech and in the transaction. Mrs.Richards uses micro-pauses to recollect her thoughts and also to continue her train of thought during her argument with Mr.Basil about her room. In written language I believe that periods can symbolize micro-pauses. In the transcript of Mr.Basil and Mrs.Richards argument it had non-fluency features like hesitation and repetition. In part a I used periods to symbolize Mrs.Richards micro pauses that were shown in the transcript of her verbal argument.  All through out the transcript Mrs.Richards tone was very annoyed and snobbish. In my complaint letter I tried to use words to create the same tone in her voice.  By looking at the verbal transcript I saw that Mrs.Richards does not use any slang terms like y'all, y'know, and any other contraction or nonstandard english.   So in my part a I did not use any slang terms or any contractions.  In written language you can use periods to symbolize micro pauses in speech and you can also use transition words to symbolize verbal fillers. Such as, the transition word"like." Mrs.Richards also has a formal tone in voice. So in my part a I created that formal tone in voice by using transition words like "furthermore."  Written language and speech are very different from each other and there is a lot of reasons why they are different but there is some reasons why they are comparable. 

Comments

  1. First off, Torquay is a proper name of a town and should therefore be capitalized. It isn't capitalized in the transcript since it does not need to be grammatically correct, but in a letter, especially one from a formal character like Mrs. Richards, it affects the voice that is necessary for the letter. Also it should be "room's view" with an apostrophe. There were a few more grammatical errors. Moving on to content, you did not really add anything new. A part of the higher bands is reworking the material, but many phrases were lifted right from the transcript. Moving on to part B, there are quite a few instances where the incorrect conjugation of a word is used. For example, in the first sentence, "seems" should be "seem" as you are referencing more than one person. Also, in the second paragraph, first sentence, it should be "There are", again because it there are more than one thing in reference. There are also some grammar mistakes with commas and several words have two spaces in between them, which is a little distracting, but it does not affect the paper itself. Content wise, you spend a lot of time just on the transcript. You are supposed to compare the two pieces, and you really only do that in the last paragraph. You do say how micropauses affect the two pieces, but you could have done that in the second paragraph. You make some good points in the third paragraph, but they are only given a sentence when the intricacies of written vs spoken language could be expanded. Also, compare means take two things and say how they are alike and different, so instead of just saying the pieces are very different, say how to prove the point you want to make.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'd put part A in band 4 and part B in band 5.

      Delete
  2. Amelia,
    To start, I would give your part A a band 3. The overall part a was pretty good, but the one major issue to me was when you used the same comparisons that Mrs. Richards used it in the sitcom. In the rubric it says, “reworking of the text” which to me means having the same idea just using different words or comparisons. Also, right at the end if you were to connect the sentence talking about the radio with the sentence before your part a would flow much better.

    As for your part B, I would give it a band 4. There are some aspects that I like about it, as well as some that need fixing. To start, the introduction paragraph is not really an introduction paragraph, unless it is meant to be a body paragraph, in which case you have no intro. I would add an intro paragraph just to sum up what you will be talking about, and that way you can say things such as verbal vs. written text rather than just jumping right in. This being said, you do not truly get into the good stuff of your paper until the last paragraph and a little in your second, when you begin to compare written vs spoken text. After all, this is the first thing stated in the rubric.
    Overall though, good job for our first paper 3.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Amelia, hey girl.
    On your part A I think you could have put a little more of your originality in there. You did make sure to have the same tone and voice as Mrs. Richards, but I felt like a lot of what you said was pulled directly out of the transcript making it not so much your writing. There were a few grammatical errors that I saw like the "Torquay." Probably a low band 3 just work on structuring your own ideas from the transcript better
    On part B, I noticed that you noted what the transcript indictors were inferring too and I feel like that was crucial to doing a part B but you didn't note how it impacted the written v spoken text until the end of your blog. You did understand the bigger picture while also focusing on the details. I feel like you part B was a band 4 because you did scrape the surface of going into a deeper understanding of comparing the two towards the end of you paper.
    Good job though, this was a hard blog to write.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment