1.
I had an argument with my friend
about what restaurant we should dine in. Both of us felt like we had the choice
to pick the restaurant and we both had different places in mind. I would
classify this as a Level 3 disagreement in Kaufer’s scale because her idea of a
great restaurant is Hobbit Hoagies or Sumo Sabi, whereas I rather go to a
restaurant like TGIFridays or O’Saka. My roommate is a brat and tends to get
mad over the smallest events if they don’t go her way. This is a conflict
because I’m a headstrong person and don’t hide how I feel so most of the time
we argue.
2.
On this page (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/02/ff-bullets-gun-violence/),
I found this quote, “Guns don’t kill people; people
don’t kill people; bullets
kill people” to be a great example of Jones’ view on negative connation that
associates with an argument. Automatically when I hear the word gun, I think of
negativity. With all the gun violence in the world today this article wanted to
stir up even more controversy about guns. This statement was written in attempt to showcase
how bullets kill people instead of guns and according to Jones’ article this a
stimulation to start many more arguments.
3.
This article is clear cut and the
opening line tells you exactly what the article is going to be about.
Peralstein does a great job showcasing how “bullets
kill people”. She sticks to The Usage Rule and understands her audience and
their level of understanding by including pictures to depict the topic.
No comments:
Post a Comment