Stylistic analysis - Bitte korrigieren!

[Verena13]

The essay "What's up in Ireland" written by John Tarver is about Ireland's troubled history. The writer does not present an objective description of Irish history which becomes clear in the language and the way he structures the text.

At the beginning, I'm going to deal with his description of Ireland.
The author emphasizes Irelands's precious by employing a metaphor when he describes Ireland as "the juwel of Europe" (l.9).
Furthermore the use of another metaphor in line 125 is meant to reveal Ireland as an innocent victim.
Besides it wants the reader to pity Ireland.
Aditionally the essay contains an exaggeration at the time when he points out Ireland's success of "intellectual and artistic progress" as an "golden age" (l.40).
Moreover he underscores the amazing Ireland by employing several positive adjectives and adverbs like "small and beautiful" (l.9) and "strikingly green landscape" (l.21), whereas the description of England is the complete opposite.
This is expressed by means of the negative adjectives "brutal political power" (l.62) and "extreme cruelty" (l.62), with which John Tarver evokes the impression that England is to blame for everything.
"Better job, better housing, better schools" (l.104). This is a repetition which makes the reader aware of the injustice between Ireland and England.
The comparison "in most aspects of life Ireland was ahead of England" (l.48) refers to the Irish superiority.
This is once more emphasized as the author employs another comparison when he points out that "it took the English over six hundred years to finally get Ireland integrated" (ll.11-12).


Dankeschön!

[Keswick (Contributor)]

The essay "What's up in Ireland" written by John Tarver is about Ireland's troubled history. The writer does not present an objective description of Irish history which becomes clear in the language and the way he structures the text.

At the beginning, I'm going to deal with his description of Ireland.
The author emphasizes Ireland's precious by employing a metaphor when he describes Ireland as "the juwel of Europe" (l.9).
Furthermore the use of another metaphor in line 125 is meant to reveal Ireland as an innocent victim.
Besides this it wants the reader to pity Ireland.
Additionally the essay contains an exaggeration at the time when he points out Ireland's success of "intellectual and artistic progress" as a "golden age" (l.40).
Moreover he underscores the amazing Ireland by employing several positive adjectives and adverbs like "small and beautiful" (l.9) and "strikingly green landscape" (l.21), whereas the description of England is the complete opposite.
This is expressed by means of the negative adjectives "brutal political power" (l.62) and "extreme cruelty" (l.62), with which John Tarver evokes the impression that England is to blame for everything.
"Better job, better housing, better schools" (l.104). This is a repetition which makes the reader aware of the injustice between Ireland and England.
The comparison "in most aspects of life Ireland was ahead of England" (l.48) refers to the Irish superiority.
This is once more emphasized as the author employs another comparison when he points out that "it took the English over six hundred years to finally get Ireland integrated" (ll.11-12).


Dankeschön!

Bitteschoen !

[Verena13]

Nun hab ich meine Analyse vervollständigt und bitte nochmals um Korrektur.
Allgemeine Tipps/Hinweise zur sprachlichen Verbesserung werden auch gerne angenommen .

...
With reference to the way he structures the text it becomes obvious that he presents the Irish history in a chronological order. After giving a short introduction, in which he leads the reader to the subject of the text, he goes on with a passage about the Celts. Then he continues with the British and their rising rule over the Irish people. At the end he gives a narration abouth the twentieth century.
This chronological order implies that the writer seems to present an objective illustration of Irish history.
Moreover the text includes a lot of paratactic sentences, which convey the impression of a objective text too, for example: "London looked on" in line 100.

After analysing the author's language and the structure of the text I am certainly justified in saying that the author does not produce an objective description of Irish history because the historical development contains the author's subjective opinion, assisting the Irish.

[Keswick (Contributor)]

Nun hab ich meine Analyse vervollständigt und bitte nochmals um Korrektur.
Allgemeine Tipps/Hinweise zur sprachlichen Verbesserung werden auch gerne angenommen .

...
With reference to the way he structures the text it becomes obvious that he presents the Irish history in a chronological order. After giving a short introduction, in which he leads the reader to the subject of the text, he continues on with a passage about the Celts, followed by the British and their rising rule over the Irish people. At the end he gives a narration abouth the twentieth century.
This chronological order implies that the writer seems to present an objective illustration of Irish history.
Moreover the text includes a lot of paratactic sentences, which convey the impression of an objective text too, for example: "London looked on" in line 100.

After analysing the author's language and the structure of the text I am certainly justified in saying that the author does not produce an objective description of Irish history because the historical development contains the author's subjective opinion, assisting the Irish.