Essay < Korrekturlesen < Englisch < Sprachen < Vorhilfe
|
| Status: |
(Frage) beantwortet  | | Datum: | 02:25 Mo 29.12.2008 | | Autor: | jarafly |
Hallo liebe Korrigierer und Helfer!
Hier ein Essay zu einer Geschichte die wir uns im Englisch Unterricht angehört haben. Ich bin mir da strukturmäßig nicht wirklich sicher, welche Form von essay da passen würde (narrative?) und ob meins hier überhaupt irgendeine struktur beeinhaltet. Unsere Lehrerin meinte wir sollten einfach ein Essay aus unseren Aufzeichnungen machen, ganz klar wie man das in dem Fall gliedert ist mir aber nicht, bisher haben wir nur pro/con (persuasive essay) drangenommen..
Ebenso unsicher bin ich mir bei den Zeiten in dem Teil wo ich die Geschichte zusammenfasse. Und dieser Summary-teil ist doch eigentlich ein bisschen zu lang, oder?
Freue mich übermäßig über Vorschläge!!
Traditional storytelling has been cultivated to bring about a cultural identity and foster a sense of community, it has been used to open peoples eyes to the realities of social and political conditions and to deride conservative religions and the status quo in communities and nation-states.
In our last English lesson before the Christmas holidays we got to know about these facts while listening to a CD of a story teller. The fiction we got told by him was about British universities and students in older times that were troubled by a German professor who came to examine and assay the worth of the work of these universities. Despite the fact that the storyteller used his stories as a vehicle to teach children skills and help building a content knowledge, the story he told was not only interesting for children. Through the tellers use of stylistic devices like irony and understatement that clearly showed the speakers wit and superiority, the story became very entertaining for adults too. The way the Storyteller expressed himself and the many voices and fun sounds he used while telling the humoristic story made listening very enjoyable.
In my essay I would like to give you a summary on the plot and the characters appearing in the story we got told.
The story opens with the description of the German professor and anthropologist as a very wise man who had read all of Shakespeare before he wrote it. As this professor is requested by authorities of the church to put the British universities to the proof, he immediately feels very honoured and proud that he has been elected for this mission.
Needless to say, none of the first universities he proves, passes through the exams so that the students of Cambridge University, who are next in line to be tested of their knowledge, become very worried. At this point of the story we get introduced to another main character named John, who is a student leader in Cambridge. John is described as to be very astute and one of the best students of Cambridge. He wears a pitch-black patch over the one eye which is faintly reminiscent to an eye patch of a pirate.
To save the universities name from defamation and ruin John comes up with a marvellous plan how to carry attack to the professor.
According to Johns plan, students needed to hid the fingerposts at crossroads the professors passed on his way to Cambridge and as the professor would ask for the way, the students, dressed up as humble-looking workers, would reply to him in classical languages. However Johns plan did not quite work out. Instead of being very much amazed and impressed by the influence the university had even on low class workers, and deciding to not put Cambridge on the proof, the professor comes to think by himself that if even crafts persons in the area are so powerfully eloquent, there will have to be an even more difficult exam for the students of Cambridge. To make it harder for the students to pass the exam, the German professor forms the opinion to test the students of Cambridge with signs instead of words.
Regardless of the fact that John couldnt have anticipated that the professor was going to react like this, his fellow students become very angry at him. Feeling very miserable, bad and hopeless John runs away. However on his way he meets the miller and tells him the whole story. The miller tells John not to worry and offers to volunteer and try to answer the signs of the professor himself. As John has no other plan, the two men swap clothes and the miller, pretending to be John, enters the university where none of the other students had been able to understand the Professors signs. With all eyes focused on him the miller is able to pass the exam.
In the following is described how he managed to: The professors signs had been an apple the professor drew out, symbolizing the world and mens sin. This sign had to be replied to by an bread symbolizing corpus Christi and meaning on figurative level that mens sin has been attuned by Christi. The miller did so and as the professor drew out the apple, he himself drew out a loaf and threw it at the professor. Secondly the professor pointed with one finger at the miller. This second sign meant that there is only one god. It thus had to be replied with two fingers pointing out, to correct that there is the son and the holy ghost as well. The miller also answered this questions right. Thirdly the professor held out three fingers. This sign symbolized that the professor agreed to the correction. However, the miller replied to this sign in showing his fist. The professor took this as the right response with the fist symbolizing that the father, the son and the holy spirit are united in trinity and declared the miller, whom everyone considered to be John, as the winner and best examinee.
Later on, after John and the miller quickly have had swapped clothes again it is revealed to the listener that the miller - although he had given the right answers - had actually interpreted the signs of the professor all differently. As the professor had drawn out the apple, the miller had feared he would be going to throw it at him and so quickly had thrown the bread before. By the fingers pointed at him, the miller feared to be picked in the eye and so had clenched his fist to defend himself.
The humorous remark and main point of the story is that the miller as a low educated men passed through the exam by actually misinterpreting the signs of the professor. The winning of the exam and the preservation of Cambridge from defamation is due to coincidence.
This clearly demonstrates the fact that the professor had been not such a wise scholar like assumed at first place but a rather stupid men as well.
To conclude I would like to add the thought that stories are a lens into the tellers values and biases. Taking everything into account I therefore firstly feel that the storyteller intended his narration to express carping critisism on the edcation system. Secondly I believe that Stories of contact with other cultures are at the heart of the intercultural experience. Therfore I think that the way the storyteller stultifies the german Professor by the ridiculous german accent the narrator puts on if he speaks in the voice of the professor, is a little double-edged and could be critically examined. Perhaps one should be wary of tales that perpetuate racism and not amuse oneself on the expense of others. Although the kidding of the professor makes the narration entertaining and very funny it still shows that narratives can cultivate a sense of cultural identity, but at the same time they can also be a means of control or exclusion.
puhh, etwas lang geworden, oder? bin mir selbst unsicher was wegkönnte...
Ich habe diese Frage auch in folgenden Foren auf anderen Internetseiten gestellt (freue mich aber dennoch sehr über Verbesserungen auch hier, so kann ich vergleichen und lernen!) (http://www.babelboard.de/showthread.php?t=14282)
|
|
| |
|
| Status: |
(Mitteilung) Reaktion unnötig  | | Datum: | 19:07 Mo 29.12.2008 | | Autor: | moody |
Hallo und
![[willkommenmr]](/images/smileys/willkommenmr.png "[willkommenmr]")
Ja du hast Recht, dein Text ist wirklich sehr lang. Ich werde aber mal morgen früh drüber gucken. Werde dann auch spätestens morgen abend fertig sein damit.
Wenn das jemand heute abend noch schafft, kann er das ja gerne tun. Ansonsten übernehme ich das morgen.
lg moody
|
|
|
| |
|
| Status: |
(Antwort) fertig  | | Datum: | 13:15 Di 30.12.2008 | | Autor: | moody |
> Essay
> Hallo liebe Korrigierer und Helfer!
Hallo und ![[willkommenvh]](/images/smileys/willkommenvh.png "[willkommenvh]")
> Traditional storytelling has been cultivated to create
> a cultural identity and foster a sense of community, it has
> been used to open up peoples eyes to the realities of social
> and political conditions and to deride conservative
> religions and the status quo in communities and
> nation-states.
Ich kann mir jetzt inhaltlich nicht vorstellen, dass das Geschichtenerzählen zum Verspotten der Religion und zum Sturz des Status-Quo da war.
> In our last English lesson before the Christmas holidays we
> got to know about these facts while listening to a CD of a
> story teller. The fiction we were told by him was about
> British universities and students in older times that were
> troubled by a German professor who came to examine and
> assay the value of the work of these universities. Despite
> the fact that the storyteller used his stories as a vehicle
Was soll das heißen? Ein Vehicle ist ein Auto.
> to teach children skills and help building a content
> knowledge inhaltliches Wissen? Schreib besser certain knowledge (ein gewisses, bestimmtes Wissen) the story he told was not only interesting for
> children.
Vermeide so lange Satzkonstruktionen. Etwas kürzer würde den Lesefluss verbessern.
> Through the storyteller's use of stylistic devices
> like irony and understatement, that clearly showed the
> speakers wit and superiority, the story became very
> entertaining for adults too. The way the Storyteller
> expressed himself and the many voices and fun sounds he
> used while telling the humoristic story made listening very
> enjoyable.
> In my essay I would like to give you a summary on the plot
> and the characters appearing in the story we got told.
Das klingt ein wenig nach einer Einleitung, sowas gehört eher an den Anfang.
> The story opens with the description of the German
> professor and anthropologist as a very wise man who had
> read all of Shakespeare before he wrote it (Sofern er nicht Shakespeare geschrieben hat). When the
> professor is requested by authorities of the church to proof
> the British universities to the proof, he immediately feels
> very honoured and proud that he has been elected for this
> mission.
> Needless to say, none of the first universities he checkes,
> passes through the exams so that the students of Cambridge
> University, who are next in line to be tested for their
> knowledge (oder to get their knowledge tested). These facts worried the students. At this point of the story
> we get introduced to another main character named John, who
> is a student leader Ein Studentenführer? Vorsitzender einer Studentenverbindung?, such dafür lieber mal ein anderes Wort, so gibt es das nämlich nicht in Cambridge. John is described as to
> be a very astute and one of the best students of Cambridge.
Man sagt einfach described as a handsome guy, oder as handsome. Eine Konstruktion mit to be wird hier nicht verwendet.
> He wears a pitch-black patch over the one eye which is
> faintly reminiscent to an eye patch of a pirate.
> To save the universities name from defamation and ruin, John
> comes up with a marvellous plan how defend the universities name.
> According to Johns plan, students needed to hid the
> fingerposts at crossroads the professors passed on his way
> to Cambridge and as the professor would ask for the way,
> the students, dressed up as humble-looking workers, would
> reply to him in classical languages. John planned to use the universitie's influence to mislead the professor on his way to Cambridge, so he wouldn't check the university. He assigned local workers to fool the professor when he asked for the way. To assure the professor has to ask for the way, they manipulated the road signs.
> However Johns plan
> did not quite work out so well. Instead of being very much amazed
> and impressed by the influence the university had even on
> low class workers and deciding not to check put Cambridge on the
> proof, the professor comes to think by himself that if even
> crafts persons in the area are so powerfully eloquent,
> there will have to be decided to let them pass an even more difficult exam for the
> students of Cambridge. To make it harder for the students
> to pass the exam, the German professor forms the opinion to
> test the students of Cambridge with signs instead of words.
Was genau soll das heißen, er testet sie mit Zeichen?
> Regardless to the fact that there was no way John couldnt have anticipated
> that the professor was going to react like this could have known about the professor's reaction, his fellow
> students became very angry at him. Feeling very miserable,
> bad and hopeless John ran away. However on his way he
> meets the miller and told him the whole story. The miller
Ab hier habe ich keine Lust alles weiter in die Vergangenheit umzuschreiben. Du erzählst hier aus der Vergangenhiet und hast auch angefangen es in der Vergangenheitsform zu schreiben, bleib dann einfach dabei. Also ab hier kannst du dir erzähltes in der Vergangenheit vorstellen.
> tells John not to worry and offers him to volunteer and try to
> answer the signs of the professor himself. When John has no
When passt hier besser, da es um etwas Zeitliches geht.
> other plan, the two men swap clothes and the miller,
> pretending to be John, enters the university where none of
> the other students had been able to understand the
> Professors signs. With all eyes focused on him, the miller
> is able to pass the exam.
> In the following is described how he managed to pass the exam: The
Ich beende mal meine Korrektur an dieser Stelle, schau dir den Link unten mal an. Dein Text ist mehr eine Summary, zumindest besteht der Großteil nur aus einer Zusammenfassung. Du schneidest kurz am Anfang und am Ende Stilmittel an und erzählst ein wenig etwas dazu.
Ich würde vorschlagen du strukturierst das noch einmal anders, und konzentrierst weniger auf Details der Erzählung.
> professors signs had been an apple the professor drew out,
> symbolizing the world and mens sin. This sign had to be
> replied to by an bread symbolizing corpus Christi and
> meaning on figurative level that mens sin has been attuned
> by Christi. The miller did so and as the professor drew out
> the apple, he himself drew out a loaf and threw it at the
> professor. Secondly the professor pointed with one finger
> at the miller. This second sign meant that there is only
> one god. It thus had to be replied with two fingers
> pointing out, to correct that there is the son and the holy
> ghost as well. The miller also answered this questions
> right. Thirdly the professor held out three fingers. This
> sign symbolized that the professor agreed to the
> correction. However, the miller replied to this sign in
> showing his fist. The professor took this as the right
> response with the fist symbolizing that the father, the son
> and the holy spirit are united in trinity and declared the
> miller, whom everyone considered to be John, as the winner
> and best examinee.
> Later on, after John and the miller quickly have had
> swapped clothes again it is revealed to the listener that
> the miller - although he had given the right answers - had
> actually interpreted the signs of the professor all
> differently. As the professor had drawn out the apple, the
> miller had feared he would be going to throw it at him and
> so quickly had thrown the bread before. By the fingers
> pointed at him, the miller feared to be picked in the eye
> and so had clenched his fist to defend himself.
> The humorous remark and main point of the story is that the
> miller as a low educated men passed through the exam by
> actually misinterpreting the signs of the professor. The
> winning of the exam and the preservation of Cambridge from
> defamation is due to coincidence.
> This clearly demonstrates the fact that the professor had
> been not such a wise scholar like assumed at first place
> but a rather stupid men as well.
> To conclude I would like to add the thought that stories
> are a lens into the tellers values and biases. Taking
> everything into account I therefore firstly feel that the
> storyteller intended his narration to express carping
> critisism on the edcation system. Secondly I believe that
> Stories of contact with other cultures are at the heart of
> the intercultural experience. Therfore I think that the way
> the storyteller stultifies the german Professor by the
> ridiculous german accent the narrator puts on if he speaks
> in the voice of the professor, is a little double-edged and
> could be critically examined. Perhaps one should be wary
> of tales that perpetuate racism and not amuse oneself on
> the expense of others. Although the kidding of the
> professor makes the narration entertaining and very funny
> it still shows that narratives can cultivate a sense of
> cultural identity, but at the same time they can also be a
> means of control or exclusion.
Die Struktur ist mehr oder weniger nicht wirklich gelungen.
Und warum selber schreiben wenn ein anderer es schon formuliert und man selber es nicht besser kann? In diesem Sinne: ![[]](/images/popup.gif) Hier findest du eine Strukturhilfe.
lg moody
|
|
|
|
