5 Matching Annotations
  1. Jan 2023
    1. Readers will be bored and will learn nothing from “says.” If we choose a more dramatic and precise verb like “calls for,” “criticizes,” “describes,” “argues,” or “questions,” then readers will feel the dynamism and momentum of both the argument and the summary.

      I agree with this portion about using more precise and engaging language. Using simple words like says will bore the reader and also possibly not convey the writers goal as well.

    1. Faced with a powerful counterargument, a writer might also admit a certain degree of uncertainty about their claim as a whole.

      I believe this adds a sense of reliability to the author. When facing counterarguments, I think it is just as important to identify maybe some flaws or holes in your own argument.

    1. In a complex text it can be easy to miss that a particular point is actually not one that the writer agrees with--they may be bringing it up in order to shoot it down.

      I think it can be fairly easy to identify whether the author agrees or not. Not all authors are as vocal about it but the language and overall tone of the work is usually how I am able to figure it out. Some authors have the tone clear throughout the entire work and some will slip it in at the very end. That is why it is so important to thoroughly read texts from beginning to end, and sometimes multiple times to get a full understanding.

    1. Claims of policy don’t have to be about dramatic actions. Even discussion, research, and writing are kinds of action. For example, “Americans need to learn more about other wealthy nations’ health care systems in order to see how much better things could be in America.”

      Claims of policy are pushing for certain things to be completed in order to solve an issue. As mentioned, the action does not always have to be dramatic. Simple or not, the purpose of claims of policy is to give some kind of command or action.