Reading Analysis Handout

Guidelines for Reading Analysis Presentations 1 & 2

Sign-up for one reading during Weeks 2-3 and one reading during Weeks 4-6. Make a note of the article titles and presentation dates that you sign up for below.

Reading analysis 1 article: __________________________   Presentation date: _______________

Reading analysis 2 article: __________________________   Presentation date: _______________

You will be presenting your analysis in class along with two to five of your classmates. The class will be counting on you to be on top of the article you are covering, so please be prepared!

This assignment is worth 40 points – to receive credit, you must participate in the presentation of your analysis. You will be graded primarily on your written analysis (breakdown of scoring below), but outstanding presentations will be rewarded.

Before you begin your work, examine the Evaluating Arguments handout.

Read the article you will be analyzing carefully. If possible, read it twice. On your first reading, just try to identify the main idea(s) and get a feel for the writer’s approach and the flow of the piece. On your second reading, go over the text more carefully; notice how the writer constructs his or her argument. You will probably want to mark up your text and/or take notes.

To prepare your written analysis:

Identify the author’s name and the title of the article. Answer the following questions. Put your answers in outline form (see sample analysis on the reverse side of this sheet).

1.     What is the central claim (or thesis) of the selection? Your answer should be a complete sentence in your own words. Be as specific as possible, but remember that your claim should cover the whole article. (12 points)

2.     Is the central claim expressed explicitly or implicitly? The claim is explicit if the writer spells out what it is. The claim is implicit if the writer only implies the claim but does not state it outright. (2 points)

3.     What reasons link the evidence to the claim? In other words, why does the evidence support the claim? Reasons may be presented explicitly or implied. (8 points)

4.     What evidence does the writer present to support his or her claim? Specify and categorize the evidence (e.g. examples, personal experiences, analogy, authoritative opinion, facts, statistical data, cause-effect reasoning, results of scientific experiments, comparison, interviews, etc. – see sample on back). Do not answer this question with detailed quotes or paraphrases from the article! For additional guidance, see the discussion of evidence on pp. 91-101 of your textbook Current Issues. (10 points)

5.     Comment briefly on the persuasiveness of the article by answering one or more of the following questions.  (5 points)

·       Is the argument convincing? Does it rely on emotional, ethical, and/or logical appeals?

·       Are there flaws in the reasoning of the argument? Does it rely on questionable sources?

·       Does understanding the argument require knowledge of the historical or cultural context in which it was written?

·       How do the style, organization, and/or tone contribute or detract from the persuasiveness of the argument?

·       What is your personal reaction to the article?

6.     Write two to three discussion questions to ask the class about the article. The best questions will stimulate interesting discussion about the issues raised in the article. You may also ask questions that “test” your classmates’ recall and understanding of the article. (3 points)

SAMPLE ANALYSIS of “Does Your Language Shape How You Think?” by Guy Deutscher

Central claim: While our native language may not be able to constrain what we can think, it influences how we think about and experience the world by compelling us to develop habitual patterns of thinking about and organizing our perceptions (Explicit).

Reason: Particularities of specific languages lead native speakers to develop “habits of mind,” such as specifying the time (verb tense) of an event, assigning gender to inanimate objects, differentiating shades of color, or using a particular directional orientation system. These “habits of mind” compel us to focus, organize, and differentiate our thinking and perceptions in keeping with the rules and customs of our particular native language.

Evidence:

• Examples of differences in what various languages oblige speakers to consider, such as a person’s gender and the time of an event (past, present, future)
• Results of experiments that show gender-related associations with inanimate objects in speakers of languages that assign gender to objects
• Results of experiments on that suggest differences in color perception among speakers of languages that have different words for colors
• Extended explanation of the Guugu Yimithirr language’s use of a geographical system for describing and understanding space
• Comparison with use of our more familiar egocentric systems 
• Related examples and narratives (stories) illustrating the resulting differences on thinking (perceiving and experiencing the world), such as the storyteller who made geographically accurate hand gestures whenever he told the same story and the hypothetical example comparing geographical and egocentric perception of the “mirrored” hotel rooms.
• Description of the Matses language’s obligation that speakers specify how a piece of information is known (directly experienced vs. inferred vs. conjectured)

Comment: The argument is very convincing because of its strong logical appeals. Each point is carefully explained and supported with logical reasoning and relevant evidence. The author avoids making broad claims and overstating his argument, which enhances the article’s ethical appeal. Personally, I agree with the conclusions of the article. When I have spoken other languages, I often felt I had to think differently, which sometimes felt difficult and unnatural. For example, when speaking French, I found it hard to remember the genders of objects; it made no sense to me that a shoe should be feminine and a hat should be masculine.

Discussion questions: What does the article suggest about the possibility (or probability) of misunderstandings between people with different native languages? Which habits of mind might encourage better (or worse) critical thinking? What did the article suggest about perception of color?