Natida Nivasnanda
Tannen makes her purpose clear in the closing paragraph of her excerpt. She acknowledges that “equal opportunity” is highly unlikely in discussion and participation (Tannen, 2015, p.373). But she encourages students and teachers to explore different options to teachings that could benefit both male and female students, catering to their differences in language rather than tipping the scale towards one gender. Tannen illustrates that women in the classroom are the ones that are affected negatively, their potential of succeeding obstructed by the traditional American styles of teaching. But Tannen’s constraints become increasingly apparent after she states claims with little support, giving her purpose less credibility. Her lack of credence sets limitations on her assertions. How can Tannen expect her audience to start the conversation of a more diverse classroom if her foundation is weak? Tannen (2015) offers “personal …show more content…
She describes men (in unrelated cultures) as participants of “a war of words… to devise clever insults” (Tannen, 2015, p.370). Men “[attack] readings” while women “express their pain” (Tannen, 2015, p.370). She created a vulgar perspective for the side regarding men, while painting an over-sensitive standpoint for women. When I think of linguistics, I do not think of it was “a war” as Tannen wrote. Language in the aspect of Tannen’s excerpt is seen as something purely verbal whereas war is regarded as negatively physical. War has connotation of violence and Tannen use of aggressive words is an attempt to persuade the reader by using disapproving language. If her main focus was to remain objective then I would say her tone was inappropriate. But if her goal was to write with her passion and dedication apparent, then I would rethink and say her tone was
Tannen makes her purpose clear in the closing paragraph of her excerpt. She acknowledges that “equal opportunity” is highly unlikely in discussion and participation (Tannen, 2015, p.373). But she encourages students and teachers to explore different options to teachings that could benefit both male and female students, catering to their differences in language rather than tipping the scale towards one gender. Tannen illustrates that women in the classroom are the ones that are affected negatively, their potential of succeeding obstructed by the traditional American styles of teaching. But Tannen’s constraints become increasingly apparent after she states claims with little support, giving her purpose less credibility. Her lack of credence sets limitations on her assertions. How can Tannen expect her audience to start the conversation of a more diverse classroom if her foundation is weak? Tannen (2015) offers “personal …show more content…
She describes men (in unrelated cultures) as participants of “a war of words… to devise clever insults” (Tannen, 2015, p.370). Men “[attack] readings” while women “express their pain” (Tannen, 2015, p.370). She created a vulgar perspective for the side regarding men, while painting an over-sensitive standpoint for women. When I think of linguistics, I do not think of it was “a war” as Tannen wrote. Language in the aspect of Tannen’s excerpt is seen as something purely verbal whereas war is regarded as negatively physical. War has connotation of violence and Tannen use of aggressive words is an attempt to persuade the reader by using disapproving language. If her main focus was to remain objective then I would say her tone was inappropriate. But if her goal was to write with her passion and dedication apparent, then I would rethink and say her tone was