subjunctive mood; critical analysis

[Shannon Stoney]

Today an ESL student asked me to explain why, in an essay she had read,
the sentence said, "If I were..." She rightly thought that it looked
incorrect. I showed her a grammar book about the subjunctive mood, but
it was hard to explain. Also, the book said that the subjunctive mood
is sort of optional nowadays, and even that it's disappearing.

Is it still mandatory in formal academic writing to say, "If I were
king of the forest..."?

Also, later another student came in with a critical analysis. She said
she was supposed to evaluate the validity of the argument, but she said
she was also not supposed to write about her own opinion. This confused
her, and me too. How can you evaluate without giving your own opinion?

In the end, I told her that I thought that meant that she shouldn't use
the word "I." For example, she shouldn't say, "I think this argument
is pure poppycock." Rather, she should adduce the arguments of other
scholars to the contrary. Is this right?

--shannon

http://shannonstoney-twors.blogspot.com/
http://branguslane.blogspot.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/shannonstoney/
http://www.eyeballkicks.blogspot.com
http://allfiber.blogspot.com

[rlunday]

Actually, this is more a matter of what's called the conditional mood;
in this case, the "unreal" conditional. it's a pattern -- a little
complex, but if a student learns it, it should make sense -- unlike
"simple" things like phrasal verbs.

Here's a resource:

http://www.englishpage.com/conditional/conditionalintro.html

Do more Google searching on "conditional mood" to find more; also,
look at the Azar grammar books (I think we have one, but I don't know
if it's the level with discussion of conditional); also, the big blue
Grammar Book should have a good explanation, and possibly the
handbooks, under their ESL sections.

*

Regarding critical analysis: it depends on the professor, so see if we
have the handout on file -- or ask the student to show you. But my
guess is this: the student should critically evaluate the essay, but
not the TOPIC that the essay is about. So, let's say the essay is
about smoking in public places; the student's critical (or rhetorical)
analysis should focus on how well the author constructs his or her
argument about smoking in public places. It should NOT be about what
the student thinks about smoking in public places.

So:

(1) student -- (2) essay under analysis -- (3) topic the essay is
about --

are the three layers; the student looks at the middle (2) layer, not
at the (3) layer, except indirectly.

Now, remember: it does depend on whose class this is for. Professors
in ENGL 1302 (or sometimes 1301) approach Rhetorical Analysis
differently. Some would say the student should simply analize the
rhetorical methods, and ignore whether they are effective or not;
others would say, focus mainly on whether they're effective; still
others would say, leave that until the end, after you objective
analyze the methods; others seem to want nothing more than a summary
of the essay (which is not right, in my opinion, but that's why you
need the assignment handout. And of course, we wouldn't tell the
student, "That's not how I would do it!").

I have asked in the past for model RA's-- since I'm doing Literature-
based 1302, I don't have any on hand; what we need for training are
some student-written RA's for the various types (various professors)
that we can study ourselves. I'll ask again...

On Nov 4, 12:52 pm, Shannon Stoney <shannonsto...@frontiernet.net>
wrote:

[laura.arzola]

Q: Is it still mandatory in formal academic writing to say, "If I were

king of the forest..."?

A: I would say yes. Of course I am ancient and of the old school. And in my native tongue, Spanish, the subjunctive is alive and well and used ALL the time. The subjunctive mood talks about something contrary to reality and deserves a place in the scheme of writing.

Q: Also, later another student came in with a critical analysis. She said

she was supposed to evaluate the validity of the argument, but she said
she was also not supposed to write about her own opinion. This confused
her, and me too. How can you evaluate without giving your own opinion?

In the end, I told her that I thought that meant that she shouldn't use
the word "I." For example, she shouldn't say, "I think this argument
is pure poppycock." Rather, she should adduce the arguments of other
scholars to the contrary. Is this right?

A: To a large extent you are right. Students can only give their opinion, but the problem is that in CA the opinion should be couched in terms that make it impersonal, i.e., don't use "I."

Also, and more importantly, the opinion should use elements coming from Ch. 3 of Current Issues, for example, which indicates that the presence of certain things in an argument make it valid and others do not. So the student needs to look for those things. For example, if the argument uses faulty logic, this makes it invalid. It is highlyinsufficient for a student to say an argument is faulty simply because she disagrees with it. Many of my students want to tell me they agree or disagree with an argument. I give them back their papers and tell them to go back to ch. 3, CI, and see what elements make an argument acceptable. It is this which the professor is looking for.

LA


Prof. Laura Arzola

English: Freshman Composition and Sophomore Literature
YES Center Director
FQK (Phi Theta Kappa) Advisor for SE
Core Curriculum Committee
HCC-SE
6815 Rustic
Houston TX 77087

713-718-7037
MC #1638

________________________________

http://www.eyeballkicks.blogspot.com <http://www.eyeballkicks.blogspot.com/>
http://allfiber.blogspot.com <http://allfiber.blogspot.com/>