Learning Paths » 5A Interacting
CTullis - Methodological Module for Textual Analysis. Devloping an argument
by - (2011-10-03)
Up to 5A - Methodological Module for Textual Analysis
The writer starts his essay with a thesis: English language is the richest for poetry. This doesn't mean that England has produced the greatest poets or amount of poetry, so the essayist wants to clarify his statement with argumentations and examples.
First English is the richest language for poetry because it has the largest vocabulary. This is due to the variety of elements of which English is made of. The elements are different languages: German, Scandinavian, Norman French, French, Latin,Celtic.
After this, the writer says that foreign languages brought to English not only the variety of words, but even the rhythmic variety, another element of richness. The languages are: Saxon, Norman French, Welsh, Latin and Greek. So English is the richest for poetry thanks to its variety of metrical elements too.
To sum up the two clarification the writer says that English is good for poetry because it is a composite from so many different European sources.
Now the essayist wants to clarify his second statement which is that England has not necessarily produced the greatest poets. Right from this, the first argumentation is that it is generally thought that the greatest peoples excel in only one art: Italy and France in painting, Germany in music, England in poetry. But in Writer's opinion it is not true for two reasons: first because no art ever been the exclusive possession of any one country of Europe and, in second place, there have been periods in which some other country than England has taken the lead in poetry. For the second statement the writer takes one example: the French movement in he second half of the 19th century made contribution to English poetry.
Going on, the essayist gives another argumentation with an example; he says that a nation which leads in a particular art form in a particular period does not necessarily produce the greatest artists, in fact both Goethe and Wordsworth were great poets.
After this the writer wants to draw the attention to another aspect: no European nation would have accomplished what it has, as far as culture is concerned, if other countries had not developed the same art forms.
In conclusion the writer gives a sort of advice for other European literature and then he explains clearly the two points of that advice: the ability of European literature to renew itself depends on two factors. The first is the ability to receive and assimilate influences from abroad, the second is the ability to go back and learn from it own sources.
First English is the richest language for poetry because it has the largest vocabulary. This is due to the variety of elements of which English is made of. The elements are different languages: German, Scandinavian, Norman French, French, Latin,Celtic.
After this, the writer says that foreign languages brought to English not only the variety of words, but even the rhythmic variety, another element of richness. The languages are: Saxon, Norman French, Welsh, Latin and Greek. So English is the richest for poetry thanks to its variety of metrical elements too.
To sum up the two clarification the writer says that English is good for poetry because it is a composite from so many different European sources.
Now the essayist wants to clarify his second statement which is that England has not necessarily produced the greatest poets. Right from this, the first argumentation is that it is generally thought that the greatest peoples excel in only one art: Italy and France in painting, Germany in music, England in poetry. But in Writer's opinion it is not true for two reasons: first because no art ever been the exclusive possession of any one country of Europe and, in second place, there have been periods in which some other country than England has taken the lead in poetry. For the second statement the writer takes one example: the French movement in he second half of the 19th century made contribution to English poetry.
Going on, the essayist gives another argumentation with an example; he says that a nation which leads in a particular art form in a particular period does not necessarily produce the greatest artists, in fact both Goethe and Wordsworth were great poets.
After this the writer wants to draw the attention to another aspect: no European nation would have accomplished what it has, as far as culture is concerned, if other countries had not developed the same art forms.
In conclusion the writer gives a sort of advice for other European literature and then he explains clearly the two points of that advice: the ability of European literature to renew itself depends on two factors. The first is the ability to receive and assimilate influences from abroad, the second is the ability to go back and learn from it own sources.