bitte diese Analyse korrigieren :)

[sanane11]

Hallo ,

kann mir bitte jemand diese Analyse korrigieren . İch hatte die Aufgabe " Examine the language the narrator uses to prove that he is sane . İch hoffe ich habe es hinbekommen.


The story "x" by x was published in 1843 and is about the narrator of the story who tells the time before and after the murder, he committed himself to destroy the evil eye of the victim.

The narrator uses a lot of argumentative techniques and language to defend that he is insane.

At the beginning the narrator demands " Why will you say that İ am mad ?" and right away he says " the disease had sharp my senses- not destroyed them" . But the reader begins to think that there is something wrong with the narrator who might have gotten sick and therefore lost his mind. The narrator knows this and he claims that his sanity can be proven when calmly tells the whole story and shows that he is not hurt by the disease.

Later on he says that his sensivities allow him to hear thinks in heaven , hell and earth that other people cannot. The reader knows that only God is heareth so the unknown narrator places himself on the same level with God and denies to be a madman who nowise can be able to have that good senses.

Later on he reveals that he was obsessed with the old man's eye and decide to take the old mans life to be rid of it. The reader still more thinks that he is mad but the narrator begins to tell how" wisely he proceeded -with what caution-with what foresight - with what dissumulatiom( he) went to work" . These qualities are not given to insane people who proceed in the way that they are foolish about their desires.The narrator's intention is to contrast himself towards insane people and show how brilliant he is .
He also underlines the claim of being brilliant by the use of the words gently , cunningly and wise when he describes his actions before and after the murder. This makes clear that he tries to umderline the question " would a mandman have been so wise as this?" to show how objective he can be while he comments on the horrible deed. His intention is to prove how calmly he can tell the story as he said at the very beginning.

Furthermore the narrator knows what the old man feels when he was in the room and " his thumb slipped upon the tin" and he describes the slught groan as the "sound that arises from the bottom of the soulwhen overcharged with awe" what gives the impression of a behavioural scientist. This fact should let the reader think that the narrator is that sane wherefore he can clarify the behaviour of others. İt is known that insane people are not even able to say why they themselves did something, so the narrator emphasizes his sanity again.

After the murder the reader is told that the narrator places his hand upon the heart to look if the victim is is dead. His action shows that it is important to him that the old man is dad and he is rid of the eye.İnsane people would not make this gesture and therefore show that they do not though-out their actions but the narrator also deletes evidence e.g. the cadavor and assures himself that there are no blood-spots in the chamber. The narrators acting creates the image of a professional criminal who behaves intelligent and detail oriented. Consequently he is not insane.

To sum up , the narrator says that he must be same to think of all the little pieces to the plan and declares himself sane when he repeats his hypersensivity several times as a proof .


Sooo das war Alles . Bitthe schreibt alles was euch auffällt auf , damit ich sehe was ich verändern soll , bitte auch Stylefehler oder Formulierungsfehler.

Dankeee

[sanane11]

Kann denn keiner helfen ?

[Keswick (Contributor)]

Hallo ,

kann mir bitte jemand diese Analyse korrigieren . İch hatte die Aufgabe " Examine the language the narrator uses to prove that he is sane . İch hoffe ich habe es hinbekommen.


The story "x" by x was published in 1843 and is about the narrator of the story who tells about the time before and after the murder which he committed himself to destroy the evil eye of the victim.

The narrator uses a lot of argumentative techniques and language to defend the fact that he is insane.

At the beginning the narrator demands " Why will you say that İ am mad ?" and right away he says " the disease had sharp my senses- not destroyed them" . But the reader begins to think that there is something wrong with the narrator who might have gotten sick and therefore lost his mind. The narrator knows this and he claims that his sanity can be proven when he calmly tells the whole story and shows that he is not affected by the disease.

Later on he says that his sensivities allow him to hear things in heaven, hell and earth that other people cannot hear. The reader knows that only God is heard so the unknown narrator places himself on the same level with God and denies to be a madman who nowise (dieses Wort gibt es nicht) can be able to have that good senses. (das macht leider keinen Sinn)

Later on he reveals that he was obsessed with the old man's eye and decide to take the old man's life to be rid of it. The reader thinks even more that he is mad but the narrator begins to tell how" wisely he proceeded -with what caution-with what foresight - with what dissumulatiom( he) went to work" . These qualities are not given to insane people who proceed in the way that they are foolish about their desires. The narrator's intention is to contrast himself towards insane people and show how brilliant he is .
He also underlines the claim of being brilliant by the use of the words gently, cunningly and wise when he describes his actions before and after the murder. This makes it clear that he tries to underline the question "would a mandman have been so wise as this?" to show how objective he can be while he comments on the horrible deed. His intention is to prove how calmly he can tell the story as he said at the very beginning.

Furthermore the narrator knows what the old man feels when he was in the room and " his thumb slipped upon the tin" and he describes the slight groan as the "sound that arises from the bottom of the soul when overcharged with awe" what gives the impression of a behavioural scientist. This fact should make the reader think that the narrator is that sane wherefore he can clarify the behaviour of others. İt is known that insane people are not even able to say why they themselves did something, so the narrator emphasiszes his sanity again.

After the murder the reader is told that the narrator places his hand upon the heart to look if the victim is is dead. His action shows that it is important to him that the old man is dead and he is rid of the eye. İnsane people would not make this gesture and therefore show that they do not though-out (dieses Wort gibt es nicht) their actions but the narrator also deletes evidence e.g. the body and assures himself that there are no blood-spots in the chamber. The narrator's acting creates the image of a professional criminal who behaves intelligently and detail oriented. Consequently he is not insane.

To sum up , the narrator says that he must be sane to think of all the little pieces to the plan and declares himself sane when he repeats his hypersensivity several times as a proof .


Sooo das war alles . Bitte schreibt alles was euch auffällt auf , damit ich sehe was ich verändern soll , bitte auch Stylefehler oder Formulierungsfehler.

Danke

[sanane11]

Danke sehr

Und noch eine Frage :

Ich möchte sagen Gott ist allhörend . Wie sage ich das ?

Und ich meinte , dass der Mann sich auf eine Stufe mit Gott stellt( because of his super senses) und dadurch betonen will , dass ein Irrer niemals mit ihm vergleicht werden kann . Denn Irre haben ja nicgt diese Eigenschaften .

Wie sagt man das ? Habe ich oben versucht :\

Und was heisst gut durchdachter Plan ?

[Keswick (Contributor)]

Hallo,

Achso . Im Fall von Gott ist allhoerend wuerde ich schreiben: God hears everything. Das Wort "heareth" ist veraltet.

The reader knows that only God hears everything so the unknown narrator places himself on the same level with God and thus emphasises that he can't be made, because a mad man could not possible have these qualities.

Ich wuerde jedoch noch einmal erwaehnen, um welche Eigenschaften es sich handelt: [..] because a mad man could not possible have the qualities of...

Ein gut durchdachter Plan ist ein "well-founded plan".

[sanane11]

Danke , Prima

So es handelt sich ja darum , dass der Mann sowohl sehr gut hören kann als auch denkt sein Sehnsinn würde den der anderen menschen übertreffen .

kann ich dann sagen :

...thus emphasises that he cannot be mad, because a mad man could not have the quality of such an acute hearing and also a very good sight in comparison with other human beings . He mentions his very good sight when he say " i replaced the boards so cleverly (..) that no human eye could have detected something wrong" .

geht das so?

Und noch eine Frage:

in der geschichte tötet der Mann einen anderen Mann und danach legt er seine Hand auf die Brust des Mannes um nachzuschauen ob das Herz noxh schlägt. Da der Mann in der Story versucht den Leser davon zu überzeugen , dass er gesund ist ( trotz der Tatsache , dass er ungesund/ ein Irrer ist ) will ich erwähnen , dass er durch diese Gestik zeigt , dass er in der Lage ist zu zeigen , dass ?....

da komme ich nicht weiter , ich hab das zwar in den Text miteingebracht, aber was für eine Erklärung könnte ich bringen ?

Vielen Dank

[Keswick (Contributor)]

kann ich dann sagen :

...thus emphasises that he cannot be mad, because a mad man could not have the quality of such an acute hearing and also of very good sight in comparison to other human beings . He mentions his very good sight when he says "I replaced the boards so cleverly (..) that no human eye could have detected something wrong" .

geht das so?

Ja das geht so! Sehr gut.

Und noch eine Frage:

In der Geschichte tötet der Mann einen anderen Mann und danach legt er seine Hand auf die Brust des Mannes um nachzuschauen ob das Herz noch schlägt. Da der Mann in der Story versucht den Leser davon zu überzeugen , dass er gesund ist (trotz der Tatsache , dass er ungesund/ ein Irrer ist) will ich erwähnen , dass er durch diese Gestik zeigt , dass er in der Lage ist zu zeigen , dass ?.... er vernuenftige Entscheidungen treffen kann? Hier kannst du z.B. statt einer Erklaerung eine Art Vergleich bringen, und erwaehnen, dass er ja den Koerper zerstueckelt um ihn unter dem Boden zu verstecken.. nur ein Irrer wuerde einen Koerper zerstueckeln ohne vorher zu checken, ob der Mensch tot ist. Das nur als Idee.

Da komme ich nicht weiter , ich hab das zwar in den Text miteingebracht, aber was für eine Erklärung könnte ich bringen ?

Vielen Dank

[sanane11]

Vielen Dank