How And When Children Acquire Language English Language Essay

How And When Children Acquire Language English Language Essay Introduction: The question to consider is how children acquire language and at which stage they could improve their speaking and listening skills. In particular, syntax and vocabulary are the main concern of the language acquisition domain. The task of psycholinguistics is to discover the relationship between language and the human mind (Field: 2003). Many theories, therefore, have emerged in exploring this relationship, which seek to explain the way in which children understand and acquire language. Over the last five decades these theories have offered various ideas and interpretations of the relationship. For example, in Behaviourist theory, which is associated to skinners research into language, language acquisition is considered a collection of habits. It is thought that children learn how to form correct utterances through positive reinforcement from the people around them (Patten and Benati: 2010). Cognitive theory, which is associated with Piaget, is considered a way of discovering how ind ividuals create and use language in their social context (ibid, p71). Interaction theory, related to Bruner, holds that language comes from the interaction between children and their environment (ibid, p99). There are, however, two theories in the relevant acquisition literature which oppose one another and provoke countless debates: Chomskys theory and Tomasellos theory. In Chomskys theory, children biologically possess an innate ability to acquire their language. This ability is mainly specific to language. Whereas, in Tomasellos theory language is acquired through language use by means of social skills, such as, joint attention and general learning mechanisms (Behrene: 2009). This paper seeks to explore these two theories in order to contrast them. The first and second parts of the paper present an overview of the main ideas in the two theories. The third part focuses on their different aspects, including the: poverty of stimulus argument, linguistic creativity, modularity and language specific domain versus domain- general learning mechanisms. The fourth and final part, discusses some weak points in the two theories. Overview of Chomskys (Innatist) theory: In language acquisition domain, Chomskys theory is called an innatist theory, because he proposed that children biologically possess suitable abstract knowledge for the task of first language learning .This abstract knowledge shapes the linguistic system which they learn. In fact, through this innate knowledge children can discover the rules of their language system and reduce hypothesis formation and guessing. (Patten and Benati: 2010). Chomskys main argument is that all human beings are born with an innate knowledge which is particularly designed for language acquisition (ibid). This argument is indeed, opposed to the one that language is a result of the interaction between human beings and the environment or item-usage learning (e.g. Skinner, 1957; Tomasello, 2003). Furthermore, The term Language Acquisition Device (LAD) was coined by Chomsky in this context to refer to such innate knowledge or the little black box (Patten and Benati: 2010).The (LAD) comprises the universal princi ples of all languages, by which children can be kept on track and not confused by all the complex rules of particular languages. When this (LAD) is activated, the child can discover the structure of the language s/he is to learn by matching the innate knowledge of basic grammatical relationships to the structures of the special language in the environment (Lightbown and Spada: 1999). However, since the 1960s, instead of (LAD) universal grammar hypothesis (UG) was introduced by Chomsky. It was given much concern by him instead of, the (LAD), because, in Chomskys view this hypothesis means that there is an innate knowledge source which governs the shape of natural language (Patten and Benati: 2010). It should be noted that the first appearance of Chomskys theory was in 1959 in his critical review of Skinners book Verbal Behavior in 1957. Chomsky in his review pointed out many shortcomings in applying Skinners theories to language acquisition. For example, Skinners experiment using rat boxes is not relevant to language because the behaviour of rats is unlike human behaviour. As a result, Skinner has a mistaken understanding of the nature of language. Furthermore, the environment considered solely as learning mechanism can not be the basis of language acquisition and therefore, mans ability to acquire language must be innate (Aitchison, 2007). Overview of Tomasellos theory (usage-based theory): The account of language acquisition provided by Tomasello comes under the umbrella of usage-based theories. Recently, a new view of language and human linguistic competence has emerged (Tomasello: 2003). This view comes from a set of theories usually called cognitive-functional linguistics, and also called usage -based linguistics in order to emphasize their main ideas that language structure is produced or appears from language use (e.g. Langacker, 1987a ; Croft, 1991; Tomasello, 1995, 2003). It is note worthy that this view stands in direct opposition to Chomskys innatist theory. Because, Tomasello in his theory is mainly concerned with the question of how children get from here to there from the constructions of infant level speech to the abstract constructions of adult thought through one set of processes of acquisition (Tomasello: 2003:3). In Tomasellos theory it is impossible that humans can have been born with a specific collection of communicative behaviours only for language . This collection more probably learned by children during their years from the linguistic conventions used around them. They must possess flexibility in order to learn both the different words and the suitable expressions of each language and the different types of abstract constructional pattern which historically these languages have grammaticized (ibid). Tomasello emphasizes, however, four points in his theory: First, the innate skills which people have are not specific to language but can be used as means for language learning. Second, theory of mind is central to symbol use, because humans can understand symbols while nonhuman do not possess this ability, because they use signal system. Thirdly, word-learning skills include: joint attention, which means the ability that children possess in their first year old whereby they can understand other people as intentional agents and interact socially through an object to which both pay attention; children note this attention to both it and themselves; Intention reading, means the ability to understand the social world around them through imitating adult acts; the construction-learning skills encompassing: analogy and pattern-finding. The latter means the distributional analysis based on statistical information in the primary linguistic data and the ability to form perceptual and conceptual figures of similar objects or situations (Tomasello: 2003). The differences between the two theories: It is noteworthy that the accounts provided by Chomsky and Tomasello comprise many opposed aspects, of which the main ones are as follows: 3.1. Poverty of stimulus argument: The basic argument of the nativist theory is based on Chomskys assumption of the poverty of stimulus (1965).This assumption means that the data provided by the input to which people exposed are not rich enough to account for language acquisition (Patten and Benati:2010). In other words, it means that the language to which children are exposed as their input or the primary linguistic data is solely a set of individual utterances yielding some abstract principles of grammar which seem ambiguous for language acquisition .The best solution he can provide is the universal grammar hypothesis (UG), which means that all humans are born with an innate universal language containing a number of abstract principles which can lead the acquisition process (Tomasello: 2003). Despite the fame of the poverty of stimulus argument in the language acquisition domain and childrens language research, it has certain, if we contrast it with the account provided by Tomasellos usage-based theory. We find that the research into the developmental psychology of language acquisition has provided many arguments which support the richness of stimulus in usage-based theories (e.g Clark2003, Tomasello 2003). In fact, the significance of social pragmatic interaction in language acquisition is evidenced by extensive findings in this domain (Tomasello: 2003). To put it more simple, Tomasello in his theory emphasizes that: There is no poverty of the stimulus when a structured inventory of construction is the adult endpoint (Tomasello: 2003:7). He notes that the hypothesis of an innate universal grammar has two major problems, namely, first, the linking problem and the problem of continuity. The first problem is how children can connect their abstract universal grammar with the particular language which they learn. The second problem deals with the developmental changes in childrens language, for example, how people can understand childrens language during their developmental change if we accept that universal grammar is always the same. It, therefore, seems useful to provide a description or explanation of child language acquisition which ignores any hypothesis of universal grammar which creates these problems (Tomasello: 2003). Accordingly, it is important to note that Chomsky and Tomasello are opposed on the argument of the poverty of stimulus. Tomasellos view, however, seems stronger, because nativists provide no support for their claims. As Pullum and Scholz (2002:47) point out, the poverty of stimulus argument still a waits even a single good supporting example. Moreover, Akhtar (2004) seems to agree with this criticism, in that she indicates that this argument was the basis for a number of nativist claims, yet indeed lack supporting empirical evidences. 3.2. Language is creative: Another difference between Chomsky and Tomasello is the formers belief that language is creative. From Chomsky perspective, creativity in language has three- fold support. First, people possess the ability to understand and produce strange sentences which they have never before heard or spoken (Aitchison: 2007). Second, the creative use of language is free from the external and internal affects of the stimulus control (Chomsky: 1968). Third, the way in which people use the language considered to be coherent and appropriate to the situation (Hegde: 1980). By the way of contrast, we can see that Tomasello does not ignore creativity in language, but he has little concern for it. According to him, it results from the attempt of humans to create categories in their own language (Tomasello: 1995). Chomsky asserts that the creativity in language is something which can not be acquired solely through environmental learning methods (Aitchison: 2007). Tomasello contrastingly asserts that, during a period of time, children obtain the communicative conventions are obtained step by step from the people around them. For example, their social cognitive skills and developing cognition are utilised to internalise these conventions. Childrens basic abilities are used to learn their first words. They create concepts so as to understand adult speech and then to produce suitable new words in their communicative contexts (Tomasello: 1995). It is thought, however, from the contrast between the two views that Chomskys view about the creativity of language has some limitations. For one thing, nativists assert that every utterance we hear and say is completely novel and accepted. This assertion seems to be wrong. The reason is that to accept it we would need to assume that each word or sentence has a separate existence. Moreover, we have to assume that our past language experience is sufficient to provide a clear understanding of the present utterances. But, if these assumptions are accepted, the result will be that human communicative behaviour has no continuity (Hegde: 1980). The second point, on the creativity of language free from the control of stimulus, seems to be weak, because, as discussed above in section (3.1) no evidence has been offered in its support. Furthermore, with regard to the third point, in Chomskys view the way that people use language is coherent and appropriate to the situation. It could be argued that this point is somewhat vague, since Chomsky admits that he can give no clear meaning to the terms appropriateness and coherent in this context (ibid). However, he stresses that the creative aspect of language is common. Humans constantly create novel utterances and many who lack this ability might be brain damaged (Aitchison: 2007). This view would be more popular if it took into account the effect of environmental learning methods in producing our utterances, since the one question that needs to be asked here is, how humans can produce them without communication with their input. 3.3. Modularity: In the areas of linguistics and philosophy of mind, the idea of modularity has raised a great deal of concern (Garfield: 1987). There seems to be another difference between Chomsky and Tomasello, about the modularity of mind in language acquisition. To illustrate, the definition of modularity according to Crystal (1998: 246) is: A term used in recent discussion of language in two slightly different ways. On the one hand, it is proposed, especially in J. A. Fodors The Modularity of Mind, that the mind is modular in the sense that it consists of a number of different systems ( modules) each has its own distinctive properties , such as the language system and the vision system. On the other hand, it is suggested, especially in government-binding theory that language system itself is modular in the sense that it consists of a number of different subsystems which interact in specific ways. The concept of modularity is that the brain is divided into separate parts, an idea to which Chomsky gives much attention (1965).He identifies the language area as a separate faculty of mind, in that language is autonomous in the mind and a separate module in the brain (Aitchison: 2007). Furthermore, he goes on to argue that the human mind is, like other complex biological systems, modular in its internal formation (Chomsky: 1984). The main idea of modularity, according to him, is that the modularity of syntax means that the structures of syntax are not the same as the structures exist in other cognitive (Chomsky: 1968 cited in Tomasello: 1995). By the way of contrast, we can see that Tomasello does not agree that language is a separated module in the brain, because, by his reasoning, in order to have a perfect grammatical theory the syntactic abilities should be combined into cognition and not like an autonomous sub-system (Parisse: 2005). To sum up, Chomskys view is a modular view in which there are different sub-parts in the mind each one possessing special characteristics. Tomasello, however, take the non-modular view that there are general principles employed in all cognitive domains which control the mind (Archibald: 1993). However, to return to the account of modularity provided by Chomsky, one of the difficulties with this account is the claim that syntactic structures are not like the structures which exist in other cognitive domains. This seems to be wrong, because it gives the idea that the syntax module is innate, yet if we give the example of the game of chess, we find that it possesses a number of unique structures, such as, the images of a knight fork or queen-a side attack- in human cognition. But there is no need to presume that this uniqueness chess- playing form needs an innate mental form (Bates et al. 1991). Moreover, the structures of cognitive thought which adults utilise in order to play the game of chess come through a process in which people employ general cognitive processes to face their problems in their social interaction which they may have had in learning to play a constructed game (Tomasello:1995). Hence, it is thought that Chomskys view seems to be weak because it is difficult to specify which part of the brain is responsible for language. As Bates asserts, it still far from knowing perfectly which parts of the brain are responsible for language (Bates in press, cited in, Tomasello 1995). 3.4. Language- specific versus domain- general learning mechanisms: Another point of difference between Chomsky and Tomasello concerns the way in which children acquire language. is another different point between Chomsky and Tomasello. The difference lies in the contention over whether language should be a specific domain or a domain general learning mechanism. A specific domain in this context means a domain specific to language, whilst, domain general refers to learning mechanisms which are not specific to language, yet applied generally. From Chomskys perspective, since, human beings are able to learn language and animals are not, this ability is considered genetically inherited (Aitchison: 2007). Nativist theory, in fact, hypothesises that children are born with universal grammar (UG), a set of innate principles and parameters. This possession helps children to learn language without making errors as they learn (Conroy and Thornton: 2005). Therefore, this assumes that children possess a pre- existing domain- specific innate form which specifies the form of their language knowledge. Moreover, in language learning in particular, syntax children obtain ability without exposure to adequate stimulus (Chomsky; 1986, Pinker; 1994). However, Tomasello believes that it is false to suppose that children have genetically endowed grammar (Tomasello: 2003). To his mind, children in order to learn their language employ item-based learning integrated with some general learning mechanisms that are used in other cognitive domains , such as, analogy (Conroy and Thornton: 2005). Moreover, in Tomasellos view the properties of language structure come from joint attention figures and not from innate language specific mechanisms (Segalowitz: 2001). As a result, Tomasello significantly did not ignore language universals; however, to him they not universals of form or a special type of syntax or linguistic symbols but are instead, the universals of human communication and cognition. For example, human beings use language in similar social contexts in order to provide solutions in language for communicative tasks, such as, describing specific entities (Tomasello: 2003). Consequently, Chomskys view that language has a specific-do main is weak , because languages differ in their grammatical relations, of subject and object, for example, Acehnese, an Indonesian language, and Tagalog, a Philippine language, do not possess these grammatical relations ( Tomasello:1995). 4. Some weakness in both theories: Tomasello, then, introduced a new model of usage-based theories in language acquisition in which he paid attention to a main set of skills, namely, intention reading, joint attention and pattern-finding skills. These skills are general skills utilised also in other types of cognition and not in language alone. Furthermore, although they are innate, they are not like the universal grammar (UG) invented by Chomsky, because they are not specific to language (Tomasello, 2003). But Tomasellos account seems to entail some limitations. It is thought that he does not provide a clear explanation for the fact that these skills are sufficient for language acquisition. As Wilson (2006:138) points out: Tomasellos central claim is that joint attention and intention reading are foundational and prerequisite for language acquisition. It does seems reasonable to assume that they are necessary for language development, but the big question is, are they sufficient? Can they entirely account for all of the complexities of language à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ from parsing speech stream to the emergence of complex grammatical structures? Hollich et al. (2000), on the other hand, seems to agree with this criticism, because they assert that Tomasellos theory, which is one of the social constructivist theories, does not possess a complete or sufficient explanation for the fact that children can produce increasingly inserted sentences in their utterances. Moreover, the problem with these theories is that they still offer no clarification of childrens ability to discover the relationships between language units. In contrast to this, Chomskys theory is considered one of the famous theories in the language acquisition domain. It has indeed, affected the entire literature language acquisition, because of the controversy surrounding it. Yet this theory too attracts a number of criticisms. In this section, we focus on four critical points made against this theory. A major criticism concerns the universal grammar hypothesis (UG) which has been discussed above. Although (UG) aroused widespread interest in language acquisition debates, it is thought, that it is based solely on abstract thinking and lacks empirical support. As Kadarisman (2007a) points out, the concept of universal grammar must be without meaning unless it has empirical evidence. But, without adequate explanations, it seems to be more a slogan than a scientific effort. Moreover, due to its abstraction, (UG) neglects the local importance of language used in the cultural context (Becker: 1995). Second, Chomskys theory is criticised for relying on logical arguments only. As Palmer (2000) indicates, Chomskys nativist claims remain are still the same as they have been fir the past two decades. Because his claims are based on logical arguments instead of, direct evidences or reasonable interpretations, his argum ents have no external support. Tomasello seems, agree with Palmer in this criticism because he states that Chomsky in his account relies strongly on logical arguments, not using the scientific study of human behaviour and cognition (Tomasello: 1995). Third, it is criticised because it can not be tested. This creates some contention around Chomskys account. The reason is that his theory has no clear cut procedures which could be examined. To put it more simple, Chomsky considered theory-construction in linguistics as similar to theory- construction in the physical sciences, particular, physics. Yet, there is a deference between these two domains, because, the mathematical model in physics depends on physical phenomena and is testable, whereas, Chomskys model relies on subjective judgments made by individual native speakers who may disagree with each other. Consequently, it can not be tested (Moor and Carling: 1987). Fourth, Chomskys theory is criticised in terms of its ideas, if considered as philosophical ideas, for instance the adoption of such innatist ideas as, the universal grammar (UG) hypothesis which is based on the hypothesis of an innate language faculty. Subsequently, many linguists (e.g. Hegde, 1980; Moore and Claring, 1987) have strongly criticised these ideas. For example, Hegde asserts that the concept of a nativist theory is merely part of an ancient philosophical idea. Furthermore, Moore and carling believe that Chomskian linguistics are linked by these ideas to philosophy, in particular, epistemology, the part of philosophy concerned with knowledge theories. Conclusion: The domain of language acquisition possesses a varied collection of theories. Their main concern is to discover the way in which people, in particular children, can acquire language. The accounts given by Chomsky and Tomasello can be critically contrasted, as seen above. They obviously stand on two opposite sides. In Chomskys theory, children are born with an innate ability by which they acquire their language, whereas, in Tomasellos theory, language is acquired through language use and not by biologically innate ability. Furthermore, the innate abilities which children have are not specific to language. However, the main aspects which have been contrasted in this paper comprised: first, the poverty of stimulus argument, in which, according to Chomsky, the input is not sufficient to acquire language, while, from Tomasellos perspective there is no poverty of stimulus; second, Language to Chomsky is creative, because it is free from the control of stimulus while in Tomasellos view lang uage results from the attempt of humans to create categories in language; third, modularity, Chomskys assertion that the mind is separated into sub-parts, whereas Tomasello believes, that general principles control the mind; and fourth, Language- specific versus domain- general learning mechanisms; either there are universals specific to language, as in (UG) hypothesis of Chomsky or, as Tomasello states universals is not specific to language but apply to all human communication and cognition. Hence, we can conclude that Chomskys account strongly relies on the hypothesis of universal grammar (UG) to support his view on the poverty of stimulus argument, creativity of language, modularity and the language- specific domain. It should be noted that the universal grammar hypothesis (UG) brought a great deal of debate among scholars of language acquisition, even though one of its limitations is that it has no empirical evidence to support it. Tomasellos account, conversely, depends on general skills in language acquisition, such as, joint attention, intention reading and pattern finding skills. Yet he did not provide adequate explanation to convince us that these are sufficient for language acquisition.

The Debate Concerning Stem Cell Research :: stem cell argumentative persuasive argument

"Stem cell research is the key to developing cures for degenerative conditions like Parkinson's and motor neuron disease from which I and many others suffer." -- Stephen Hawking As college students, it is important that we know and care about the issue of stem cell research. Stem cell research is currently legal in most countries. The United States, normally a leader in new frontiers, is one of the last to explore this territory. As it is slowly being pushed forward, we are going to have to know about it. If it keeps progressing, we as citizens will have to vote on it. It affects most of our lives in a personal way. Most of you know at least one person with diabetes, Alzheimer’s, or Parkinson’s. Perhaps even you will face one of these illnesses at some point in your life. It is important to know about issues like stem cell research, which can help many people in our society. Stem cell research is becoming an issue that is one of the most profound of our time. The issue of research involving stem cells derived from human embryos is increasingly the subject of dinner table discussions and a national debate. The issue is confronted every day in laboratories as scientists ponder the ethical consequences of their work. It is agonized over by parents and many couples as they try to have children, or save children already born. The issue is debated within the church, with people of different faiths, even many of the same faith coming to different conclusions. Many people are finding that the more they know about stem cell research, the less certain they are about the right ethical and moral conclusions. What is stem cell research? It starts with an embryo. An embryo is created when a male sperm and a female egg are joined. A large number of embryos already exist outside the natural environment. They are the product of a process called in vitro fertilization, which helps many couples conceive children. When doctors match sperm and egg to create life outside the womb, they usually produce more embryos than are planted in the mother. Once a couple successfully has children, or if they are unsuccessful, the additional embryos remain frozen in laboratories. Some will not survive during long storage; others are destroyed. A number have been donated to science and used to create privately funded stem cell lines.

Free Raisin in the Sun Essays: Pride and Dignity :: A Raisin in the Sun

Pride and Dignity in A Raisin in the Sun "A Raisin in the Sun" by Lorraine Hansberry follows a black family's struggle to see their dreams through to fruition. These dreams, and the struggles necessary to attain them, are the focus of the play. As the play begins a husband, Walter, and wife, Ruth, are seen having a fight over Walter's dream to become a 'mover and shaker' in the business world by using an insurance check as a down payment on a business venture. Walter tells his wife that, "I'm trying to talk to you 'bout myself and all you can say is eat them eggs and go to work", which is the first sign of Walter's recurring feelings that if someone in the family would just listen to him and put forth their trust his dreams would come to fruition. Following this argument Walter goes off to his job as a chauffeur which is the job he so longs to be done away with because he would rather "be Mr. Arnold[his employer] than be his chauffeur. This episode illustrates a major conflict throughout the story. As Walter dreams bigger and bigger he seems to leave the 'smaller' things such as his family behind. This movement away from the family is against the furtherance of the values and morals of the family. While his father would have been happy simply working and caring for his family, Walter is more concerned with becoming a 'mover and shaker' without thinking about the resulting consequences for his family. Later in the morning Beneatha, the younger sister of Walter, initiates a conflict by speaking in an unacceptable manner about God – seemingly rejecting values that have been taught to her since childhood. This event shows yet another time in which a family member threatens to ruin the inherent stability of the family structure by trying to build in a manner which is completely incompatible with the rest of the structure. Beneatha, although believing to be bettering herself is leaving an important part of herself and her heritage behind. Beneatha's speech about God is her attempt to show her independence and uniqueness in the world, but when she asserts her self in an area that is extremely sensitive to the family heritage and structure, she threatens to wean herself from the only guaranteed support group in life, the family. Once again, as with Walter, Benetha realizes later in the story that it is the furtherance of long-standing family values and morals which give the foundation upon which to build a wonderful life.

Life Without Music Written by a 4th Grader

â€Å"Without music, life would be a mistake (Friedrich Nietzsche)†. What is the function of music to life and to the society? By definition, music is the art or science of combining vocal or instrumental sounds (or both) to produce beauty of form, harmony, and expression of emotion. Music universal and without it, the world would be a totally different place, and in this essay I will discuss how. Firstly I will be discussing about how music is extremely important and then I will talk about a counter-argument on why this is not so.For my counter-argument, it will be based on the premise of modern music. â€Å"It’s the music that you choose† – 19-2000 by Gorillaz in their debut album Why is music important? Music is a universal language, but what does this mean? Music, or at least good music, conveys a lot of emotion, ideas and notions that are inexpressible in English, or any other language. What does music do? Music breaks this language barrier and provid es people with means of communication. It inspires common human feelings and bridges gaps between cultures that spoken languages cannot.It brings people together and creates universal community. â€Å"After silence, that which comes nearest to expressing the inexpressible is music. † – Aldous Huxley Music is one of the best ways to evoke emotions healthily. It touches our emotional being and evokes moods and feelings that are sometimes difficult to express. It can change a difficult mood and make it happy or excited; it can change a light mood and take it deeper and more profound. For people who are not good at expressing their emotions, music is a very good method to do so.It has been shows that people with Asperger’s Syndrome ( high-functioning autism) benefit from music. Bottling up emotions is extremely unhealthy. If music be the food of love, play on. – William Shakespeare One good thing about music, when it hits you, you feel no pain. -Bob Marley Mu sic also generates an ambient atmosphere. You can use music in any environment to enhance and augment what is already there. For me, personally, music is my sanctuary. Music is my release of emotions and I love ‘feeling' the music.I put everything I have into it so I can put the emotions the composer was feeling when they wrote the piece. Then when I’ve finished playing/listening I feel like I’ve accomplished something great. Music is something that I can control and change to fit whatever I’m feeling. Religious people also claim that music heightens their spirituality. Every religion on the planet uses music in some form or the other to enhance the soul, whether it is the rhythmic chants from Buddhism or the devotional songs in Hinduism.Music is recreational; listening to soothing songs can be a way of relaxing and allowing your body and mind to take break from the monotony of life. Studies have proven that music can be a good way of helping your imaginat ion develop There is nothing in the world so much like prayer as music is. – William P. Merrill There are other various benefits from music such as enhanced brain function, helping develop the imagination, and making mundane and boring activities much, much more enjoyable â€Å"Reality leaves a lot to the imagination. † – John LennonThere really is no objective answer to the question â€Å"Why is music important†. It inspires people and allows us to get in touch with our emotions in a way that is unique. For those amongst us who find it difficult to express ourselves, music can evoke reactions. Your mood can change from dark and depressed to elated and delirious happiness with just the selection of the right track and a hit of the play button. Music works wonders on creating a certain atmosphere. You can use music to liven up a boring party or to create a romantic ambiance.For my counter-argument I will modify Nietzsche’s quote by a little, â€Å" Without Good music, life would be a mistake (Friedrich Nietzsche)†. I completely agree with Nietzsche’s statement of how without music, one’s life is incomplete. In modern music there is no depth and emotion in their music and this can be seen from artists like â€Å"Lady GaGa, Justin bieber, Katy Perry and various others†. I shall quote from the song â€Å"poker face† by Lady GaGa, she repeats â€Å"Poker face† till infinity.There is no emotion or feelings conveyed in this type of music, therefore, life is incomplete without Good Music. In conclusion, music is essential in the lives of people as it plays a significant part that no other such form of entertainment can replace and conveys emotions and feelings no language can convey. ——————————————– [ 1 ]. https://www. google. com. sg/search? sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=what+is+music%2F#hl=e n&q=music&tbs=dfn:1&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=7uiXT6i5N5GzrAeWoY2oAQ&ved=0CCsQkQ4&bav=on. 2,or. r_gc. r_pw. r_cp. r_qf. ,cf. osb&fp

Cloning human Beings is not ethical Essay

† Here Dickens abruptly changes the atmosphere and creates one of sadness and regret, and so he uses his mutual technique to change the atmosphere in reflection to Scrooges feelings, and he does this here to link the moral message with emotive feelings the reader is experiencing, to make it more powerful. Here he is aiming to imply that you will regret not giving money and love to the more unfortunate than you, even if you don’t feel that way at the time. Further on in this chapter, Dickens creates powerful atmospheres to develop his moral message further. He most notably does this when Scrooge enters his joyful old boss’ (Fezziwig) warehouse where he was apprenticed. Whilst Dickens is describing the Christmas event as happy and ecstatic, this develops a powerful atmosphere by numerous significant ways. For example, whilst the event is happening, he repeats over and over again: â€Å"In came†¦ in came†¦ in came†¦ in came,† to describe the entry of the guests at Fezziwig’s event, and Dickens uses this to develop an atmosphere and a theme of joyfulness and togetherness, and that consequently shows, due to Dickens’ recurring technique, that the intended effect on the reader is to make him/her feel happy. This suggests that nearly everyone was keen to be celebrating Christmas together by all appearing one by one at this event. He is intending the reader therefore to feel part of the happy occasion, and this is emphasized by the fact that lots of people are coming, which essentially suggests that everyone is welcome. This conveys richly with the spirit and meaning of Christmas that Dickens is attempting to put forward in his moral message, through the use of this atmosphere. He is expressing that Christmas time is a time for sharing and spending time with your family and friends, which is reflected in Scrooge’s youth, but contrasts with Scrooge’s life at present. Therefore, this makes Scrooge, due to the ‘Ghost of Christmas Past’, think more about how he is acting at the present, where he is anti-social and refuses to acknowledge that he has to be sharing and caring during Christmas time. As well as successfully creating, building, and developing atmospheres to develop a moral message in chapter two, Dickens uses suspense in chapter 4 to try and make the effect of the moral message more powerful to the reader by using a darker theme. Dickens creates a spookier and sinister atmosphere straight away at the start of chapter four, and he does this so the reader can then appreciate the suspense. Dickens does this because he intends the reader to get gripped into the darker theme and storyline, and as said above, this makes the moral message more influential to the reader. For instance, he does this at the start of chapter four, when Dickens describes the entrance of the ‘Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come’ as he writes: â€Å"The Phantom slowly, gravely, silently approached. The very air through which this Spirit moved seemed to scatter gloom and mystery. † This creates sudden suspense and it also creates a dark theme to lay the foundations for this chapter. Then, Dickens creates more suspense by not making the ghost/phantom talk. By doing this, Dickens is deliberately developing suspense by leaving the reader in the unknown, and is equally implying by this that everyone is going to die at some point, due to the dark theme and the places this ghost takes Scrooge to. In addition, making the ghost just use its hands to guide the way for Scrooge makes him as a result become more timorous and this adds to the suspense and atmosphere. Dickens uses even more clever techniques to draw the reader’s attention and make them even more aware of the moral message. He writes: â€Å"`It’s likely to be a very cheap funeral,’ said the same speaker;’ for upon my life I don’t know of anybody to go to it. Suppose we make up a party and volunteer. ‘ `I don’t mind going if a lunch is provided,’ observed the gentleman with the excrescence on his nose. `But I must be fed, if I make one. ‘† The man’s attitude here is that he does not take Scrooge’s death seriously and is using it as an opportunity to make a joke out of. Dickens uses powerful dramatic irony as the reader knows that those people were talking about Scrooge, however, Scrooge is not aware of this until later. Dickens does this appropriately in the light of the darker theme, because he intends to again powerfully convey his moral message to the reader, and because he portrays those people to be talking carelessly about Scrooge, and approaching his death with a considerable amount of blasi , he hopes to indirectly tell the reader that if you spend your life keeping all your riches to yourself and not being generous and kind-hearted, nobody will care about you and show respect for you when you are dead. – Scrooge is used as an example to what the fate is of those who do not follow Dickens’ moral message. Another example of suspense and atmosphere revealing this moral message is when ‘old Joe’ and ‘Mrs Dilber’ are pictured having stolen a bundle of Scrooge’s possessions and are looking through them. Dickens builds on the uncanny atmosphere and theme he has created in chapter four, and writes about more people talking indifferently about Scrooge’s death: â€Å"`If he wanted to keep them after he was dead, a wicked old screw,’ pursued the woman,’ why wasn’t he natural in his lifetime. If he had been, he’d have had somebody to look after him when he was struck with Death, instead of lying gasping out his last there, alone by himself. ‘† This later extract ceases to be dramatic irony once Scrooge has found out that these people had been talking about his death, and therefore it plays an important part in the development of Scrooge’s characterisation, because after having seen the consequences of his unkind and selfish behaviour with all three ghosts, his reactions to this dialogue suggest that he wants to change his character, and this is confirmed soon after when he wakes up in chapter five, and greets everyone a ‘Merry Christmas’ in the street.. In conclusion, it would be fair and accurate to say that this novel was written solely for the purpose of getting the people of Victorian Britain to change their attitudes towards the ‘deserving’ and the ‘undeserving poor’, through the use of haunting and ghosts. It was intended to deliver its moral message through the use of atmosphere and suspense, and to convey this message through varying themes. On the whole I have thoroughly enjoyed reading this novel, especially chapter two whilst looking through Scrooge’s past, as it reveals a lot of what his true inner personality is, regardless of what his spiteful character is described as in chapter one. I also like this novel as it has a fitting end regarding the moral message, which is, in this case, we all have the possibility to change our personality for the good. My opinion is that Dickens without a doubt achieves all his intentions with the successful use of the Ghosts of Christmas Past, Present, and Yet to Come being the key in Scrooge’s characterisation and Dickens’ utter proficiency in the art of the English language enables us to depict his novel as a fine one. And, as for Scrooge’s journey, it is a lesson to be learnt from by all of us, in any era.

Contemporary Leader Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Contemporary Leader - Essay Example He has genuine charm and a charismatic personality to capture his audience. His political motto â€Å"Change we can believe in† is attractive and believable and has already drawn several supporters from both the major political parties in the country – The Republicans as well as The Democrats, who advocate and promote his views and beliefs (Obama, 2008). His bipartisanship quality has the ability to bring the nation together and create a bond that would further strengthen the nation’s overall supremacy. His policies have the capability of bringing two of the nation’s biggest political parties – The Republicans and The Democrats together in terms of agreement and acceptance of his desired goals and visions. He has the required wisdom and intelligence to foresee the impact of certain political decisions, which is evident from his firm stand on the Iraq war issue. His strong leadership qualities are characterized by his exemplary vision for the nation which involves creating hope and maintaining the promises that the leaders make to the citizens of the country. His stand against the establishment on non acceptance of money, especially from special interest groups and beliefs in being upfront and ethical further strengthen his image as a leader and a visionary that America today, needs. However like several other contemporary leaders, Obama too has certain weaknesses such as lack of experience, his race, name, views on foreign policies, etc. Obama lacks largely on the experience factor. His political experience is far less than the other top tier politicians in the country. Moreover, his race might also prove to be a deterrent to probable voters, as African Americans, historically, have barely made it to the top. Also his unusual sounding name, Barack Hussein Obama, might confuse voters about his real identity and pass wrong messages raising doubts about his political

Reflections on Food Solution in My Neighborhood Coursework

Reflections on Food Solution in My Neighborhood - Coursework Example Encourage schools to purchase healthy food for the students from local growers that are known to be sustainable farmers †¢ Good food offerings are unaffordable †¢ National school meal program to supply healthy meals to children †¢ Teach people about how they can preserve, cook, and share food for the benefit of those that cannot afford. †¢ Food wastage †¢ Create food awareness through environmental studies and community Arts movements that advocate for social change regarding food conservation †¢ Unhealthy, poorly cooked and cold lunch program †¢ Encourage the Good Food Cafà © that offers a healthy hot lunch program for school kids †¢ Malnutrition and hunger is rampant due to inadequate food supplies and poverty. †¢ The government should create school meal programs to provide children with constant food supply. †¢ Encourage diverse culinary tastes for multicultural population to honor the different cultural rituals †¢ Kinderga rten children change their attitude towards fresh fruits and vegetables †¢ Encourage children to eat fresh fruits and vegetables more than processed and canned food. †¢ Collaborate with food scholars and non profit private and public organizations to exhume, document and link people with their food practices to determine where health deficiency occurs. †¢ Form organizations such as Food-share that supplies fresh, nutritious, and affordable fruits and vegetables to children and adults every month.