A. How many perspectives do you engage? I think I engage two perspectives. I agree with Pollan about how we need to be more organic and how companies try to trick us to think that they are organic but I also agree with the fact that times have changed and it might to be possible for us to achieve Pollan's definition of organic.
B. What other perspectives might you include? Besides my perspective and Pollan's perspective, I include the perspective of reality and possibility.
C. How do you distinguish your views from the other views you summarize? I distinguish my views from the other views because I describe what they're saying and then I specifically say my views in return.
D. Do you use clear voice-signaling phrases? At first I use phrases that make sense to me but I always make sure I have somebody else read my paper as well to make sure I didn't just write a bunch of nonsense down that only I would understand.
E. What options are available to you for clarifying who is saying what? The easiest way to clarify who is saying what is to give credit to who you are quoting so you don't get mixed up between whose opinion is who's but that often gets boring after awhile. You can embed their name in your own sentence or by using voice-identifying devices.
F. Which of these options is best suited for this particular text? I think for this text it would be best to use voice-identifying devices because there are many difference sentence structures that you can use so your paper doesn't get boring. For example, you can use "My view, however", "On the contrary", "Someone argues", and so on.
No comments:
Post a Comment