Blog Post 14

I. Rhetorical Overview of the Article

1. Bryson’s exigence is to promote the idea that following English rules constantly is not a necessity since the rules are constantly changing.

2a.The audience is Brysons peers that either work with him or are other educators because he uses the word “we” several times which suggests that he is speaking to people that are on the same level as he is when it comes to experience in the English field.

2b. He would have to dull down his vocabulary use while also using the word “you” more frequently to make a connection to people my own age.

3. Thesis: “Not to put too fine of a point on it, the labels are largely meaningless” on the first page, at the end of the first paragraph.

II. Summary

1. In “Good English and Bad” Bryson explains how there is no right or wrong ways to use English because of the simple fact the “rules” and language are constantly changing.

2. There is not good or bad English, you can make up your own rules as a writer as long as the reader knows what your talking about.

III. Burkean Palor/Intertextuality

1.   This article relates mainly to the Dawkins article because both articles try and change our views on the idea of not following English rules closely because of how rapidly the rules can change.

IV. Personal reflection

1.   Bryson made me question a lot about what I know and how I use English rules. I think this made me realize that the English language is constantly changing and that following the rules closely is a waste of time.

2.   I really don’t feel like he had much evidence to support his claims at times which to me made his argument invalid, but at the same time it did get me to start questioning English rules and why they even exist.