1. “Civility in public discourse is important.” In this opening, Chavez intends to convey to the reader that politeness and consideration for others is important in public situations (on TV or the radio), but not to the extent where certain basic English words can no longer be used as they could lead to dangerous accidents like the recent shooting in Tucson.
2. Chavez used the word bellicose, meaning belligerent, when she was describing the different phrases used in politics that can also double as military terms. She chose this word specifically I think because she was trying to show people that these political phrases, while sounding hostile and belligerent, are ambiguous and don’t mean what they literally say.
3. A) Chavez is attempting to persuade the reader to see that these words have absolutely no connection to problems that have occurred, such as what happened in Tucson, but it’s “the context and intent that matter.”
B) The best example that supports her point is where she wrote about the Los Angeles Times banning words such as: Indian, Hispanic, ghetto and inner city. Once again, it’s not the words that matter or cause harm, but it’s in the negative way in which people use them toward other people or situations.
4. I agree wholly with Chavez, especially on the point where she says that banning words has no effect whatsoever and would only “deprive us of the ability to express ourselves fully.”
No comments:
Post a Comment