Conca is trying to reach a bigger demographic in this case, instead of identifying with just english user he gives an historical point to the mysteries and challenges that lie with every language. Not just for english users in the states but for the sake of every person in world communication and manner in which is presented is important to preserve.

Conca brings in different media information. He brings in a second medium into the mix to try to reach the audience from a different point of view. It does use several modes like linguistic and gestural. He uses words that can be quite subjective like "believed" or "intelligible". And does leave a link to the other media, to connect issue of similar subject to another point of view.

This is a more gestural mode of communication, it provides a more interactive form of communication. It provides the authors social media and a link to his published book. It provides a bio and a more detailed insight to who Dr.Conca is and what his mindset towards the subject is. It helps the reader better understand the authors point of view and purpose.

Conca is showing that all forms of multimodal communication must be used to get the maximum effect for the maximum amount of time. The better organized it is for the reader to understand the message.

The data charge can further help readers understand the situation. By presenting data with visual aid readers can now see the changes that are happening rather than just try to think about them by reading it. Also it creates a better point of argument and persuasive tone by using data charts such as these.

Again showing the importance of linguistic modes of communication by presenting multiple languages on information it allows for a more significant chance that it will be understood by a larger demographic.

In this section Conca is suggesting a almost cultural vibe of safety to pass from generation to generation. It's similar to traditional practices passed down to from generation to generation like cow-tow or meditation. This idea is leaning more towards a spatial modal representation of message. By creating a more closer proximity between people and the ideas of safety it will allow for a more universal sign that will last for generations.

Showing signs of danger that are only prevalent in our time will not work. Conca is suggesting something further than what can written or what can be shown. The message has to present some aura around it to make it more intimidating when giving off cautions. This Aural mode of thinking can come from take elements from both visual and linguistic modes to create a more emphasis to the message someone is trying to portray.

Using a more visual presentation may be more efficient, if we are talking about thousands of years into the future. The use of the visual modal context of the photo shows a universally negative image, even if a person doesn't know the context of the photo, the dark colored imagery and overall negative vibe of the photo shows to anyone what is up ahead is not good.

Conca brings a very interesting point to the matter, from the context of the article the reader knows that it's referring to the nuclear danger zones that people should not enter and have clear markings warning them. But Conca suggest that how will people understand the phrase and how will they interpret it? "STAY OUT!" can mean several things it could be someone's land or secured property by the government. Without the context of linguistic modal text ideas and message can be understood in a risky way.

The writer brings a more modern and relatable point of view into the the mix. Since in this day in age almost everybody in America has a smartphone it makes it more easier for the readers to understand the point he is trying to make. Then brings up a controversial point of Arab terrorist using smart phones to act out violence. A entirely different but similar view to take based on the machete argument. It strengthens his claims, the more some isolates different realms of reason the more the topic can handled more circumspectly. (Haltman 7). He broadens his horizons by presented a more relatable topic to the audience instead of just sticking to just a provincial topic of farming tool and weaponry.

Another personal aspect of the writer personal life to further his argument. Growing up farming this cultural portrayal of machetes as weapons undermines his identity. A traditionalist view on the matter shows that the culture that the writer grew up in is being over taken by a violent and terror fantasia that is infecting the the idealism of his identity. He is also trying to gain sympathy with the audience, portraying his old livelihood being destroyed in front of his every eyes. Using pathos to persuade his audience of this cultural take over.

Media shapes culture, culture shapes society, and society can shape politics. It is cultural examples such as these that really show how influential media can be. Especially in movies that glorify tools to be weapons. Haltman states that there are metaphysical aspect that embody culture.

The writer bring in the view of revolt which runs deep in American culture since really the foundation of America was based on revolutions. This article was most likely published to feature an American audience so by bridging its emotional and cultural history is a great persuasive tactic. Though it never explicitly said revolts the use of slaves and pheasants using machetes as a weapon can imply such. The writer is trying to discretely imply this notion to the reader in order to make them think and have a deeper and more personal connection with the topic.

Object can signify any form of history, culture or emotion depending on how it presented. As Haltman puts it the views on objects can be potentially limitless but why do some views have more significance than the others. Well it all comes down to the culture of it. A recent bate on gun violence have surged popular media both main and social. Historically in America guns were used as a point of self-defense and a balance of power but recent tragedies in Parkland and Las Vegas and any other mass shooting in America has depicted them as killing machines. As practical as a "tool" maybe the cultural significance will always tip the scale to what society depicts it to be.

It amazing to think that a simple farming tool used for corn can become the embodiment for killing and terror. The machete is not the only " tool" this is happened to. The ever so famous ninjas of Japan were actually simple farming tools before the iconized as weapon for Asia most notorious assassins. Small katana were used for slicing crops but have become a trademark weapon for the group. And even scythes that were used for cutting down wheat plants has become culturally a symbol of death held by the grim reaper to rip the souls out of the living. It just goes to show that an object can have two polar ideas based on culture and significance.

A great use of multimodal function here bringing in a book to the argument in hand. It brings in a entire view of American culture into the mix by depicting a machete as weapon. The way that the writer explains it and the picture depicted on the bottom show the machete to be a weapon of terror or fear, as oppose to the tool for survival and nourishment that the history would suggest. So in American culture could it be the a machete signifies weapons and fear more than tools? And considering that the writer he read it in high school it can be assumed that many english classes in throughout that sate even the nation have the same idea about it. As Haltman wrote it's important to know what the object might signify but attention how they might be signify. (4)

These historical contexts make a strong point of evidence to argument. A lot of times when examining a object its historical meaning comes to mind and bringing up dark historical points in America's history of slavery to argument brings up some emotional feelings to the mix. It goes beyond the scholarly talk of an object and expands the idea of the object to further the readers interpretation of it. By using more of these emotional deductions it serves as a bridge to speculation about meaning for the reader. (Haltman 8)

Tools or weapons can be best described in words and how the reader sees the object after that is all dependent on the writers diction and view. In descriptions "writers generate a set of carefully selected nouns, adjectives, adverbs, prepositions, and to effectively determine the bounds pf possible interpretation." (Hatlman 6) Using words such as "violence" or "deadly" will most likely make it seem like a weapon in this instance. More than anything the type of diction that a phrase has can drastically change what the word will mean or what it will mean to the reader.

This section brings up a very interesting point in the argument, though uncommon in the U.S many places outside the U.S use a machete as a tool (especially in tropical rain forrest areas) but in many part of American culture it's depicted as weapons such as movies, video games, and entertainment outlets. This could be what Prown calls a polarity which in turn finds material expression in a language of formal oppositions. That one single object what mean two completely perpendicular concepts. It can be perceived as one or the other depending on point of view of the beholder.

The publisher of the article says a lot of suggestive words like "seemingly" or "might" and "perhaps". All these words are suggesting these articles aren't a 100% true, they aren't 100% false but the publisher is making an inch seem like a mile. And with such a short article and low evidence can this "archaeological find" really be credible? I wonder if he actually knows if its a fraud or he really thinks its the real deal? When Haltman writes,"This is why the words we choose in saying what we see have such far reaching importance." Suggestive words like these make an article seem much more appealing and credible. It is too often we convince ourselves that something we read is 100% percent true just because the way that its written. This can be an incredible gift but when used improperly can lead to dire consequences. Fake news articles use certain words and diction to make seemingly outrageous ideas appear plausible. "Hillary Clinton and pizza child sex ring" is a prime example even leading to a shoot up at the pizza shop all because of one well worded fake article.

Almost like a yin and yang concept. combining both the intellectual and emotion self together is how some can achieve a higher understanding of an object. Let your mind take you through the motions and use research to back up your claims and leading to more interpretations.

Use the emotional connections and imagination broaden your horizon and back the claim with research to solidify it. Also research is a good way to find more interpretations that was seen or though of before.

Certain things can make people feel a certain type of way. Like a beach can make a person feel happy and relaxed, a forrest or large landscape could make a person feel adventurous and outdoors nostalgia. If one person feels it chances are other have to. By feeling this emotional connection it will open the doors to more elaborate and better meanings of an object.

Why rush it? Wine is best when aged and properly handled but if rushed it will taste terrible. Rushing into analysis an connections will lead someone to have an unbalanced bias on the object. This will lead to a narrow view and ultimately make the object less significant as a whole.

The possibilities are limitless but it up to the perceiver to make sense of. Connections to history, moral values, personal experience, current events, and symbolism can amount to this.

It's good to have a certain idea about an object but leave room for improvement, there are limitless thoughts and ways that a person can represent something so its always better not jump the gun and see everything that can be represented.

As for the reader, they cannot be on a certain bias or narrow view point as this will close up any gates to further analysis. If a person is stuck a title on a object so rapidly they are then limiting themselves as readers and writers broaden their horizons to better or more constructive works.

Having limited views on a subject can take out several possibilities to what an object might mean and how the reader will view it. This can limit creativity and the functionality of what an object might mean. If an object was a sword and it give an historical view of King Author's excailber than that leave out the view the reader perceiving the sword as a landmark any other culture or any other famous sword in world history or symbolism for battle or courage.

Diction can be a extremely valuable tool to writers and readers a like. Changing one word or one phrase can change the entire meaning of the object or subject in mind. Certain religious groups take objects and treat them as if it were a living being or person, giving them a human characteristic it personifying the object into something more than an average person might think. Putting a single adjective to a word can change the an object all together. If I said "The grail is over there" can mean a simple antique cup is sitting across the room but if I put the adjective "Holy" in front of it people will recognize this as the ancient legend of the Holy Grail in the bible that give everlasting life. Same with names life Alexander and Alexander the Great. One is a popular western name while the other was a King of an empire.

A certain sense of iconography and symbolism needed. For example a person could look at a tree and think nothing of it but a shaman might look at the tree as something deeper than just roots in ground or a piece of wood. They might see it as a representation of life flowing through the Earth that is ultimately connects everything even humans together. Same would be said about Hindu religion and their view of the world. Seeing as they are hundreds if not thousand of different gods in Hinduism that each represent a certain aspect of life. They might see the sun as a god or the rivers or the ground because that is their view on it. So a single object can in fact mean many different things depending on the culture or point of view of the beholder.