Potluck
The meaning of Doublespeak in Lutz opinion...
The essay “Doublespeak” specifically dives into the significance of the idea. The author does not hold back, but early on defines the general meaning of Doublespeak. The author’s introduction is the explanation of doublespeak in general context. He lets the reader know beforehand about many tangents in double speak. He mentions four types of doublespeak which are euphemism, jargon, gobblygook, and complex language. From these sub groups of double speak, he further explains detail of such doublespeak and its effect to the public. In essence, the effect of the author is to inform the audience precisely about doublespeak in many angles. He does not take a strong stance on his argument, but he does let his audience know that double speak is an effective rhetoric to use in certain circumstances.
The idea of euphemism is to sugar coat an instance. This can be used by simple diction or a whole statement. It is up to the writer to choose his/her method. Lutz leaves the choice to the audience, but provides certain examples to let the audience be informed with the affect of euphemism in a statement. In essence, he provides short and precise examples by comparing a straightforward statement with a doublespeak statement. He informs the reader that euphemism is a rhetoric that creates vagueness in a blunt statement. In my opinion, Lutz did a fine job. The omission of any statements will leave the essay vague and blank, in a sense.
Secondly, Lutz explains and defines jargon to be a prestigious type language to impress and inform an audience. Many of the high class workers use this rhetoric in their professions to make a good impression. In essence, a jargon can be used in a hospital, court, or any other professional environment. Lutz provides the reader with positives and negatives regarding this rhetoric. He informs his reader to be well aware of using such rhetoric. The examples provided are precise and clear cut. In essence,
The essay “Doublespeak” specifically dives into the significance of the idea. The author does not hold back, but early on defines the general meaning of Doublespeak. The author’s introduction is the explanation of doublespeak in general context. He lets the reader know beforehand about many tangents in double speak. He mentions four types of doublespeak which are euphemism, jargon, gobblygook, and complex language. From these sub groups of double speak, he further explains detail of such doublespeak and its effect to the public. In essence, the effect of the author is to inform the audience precisely about doublespeak in many angles. He does not take a strong stance on his argument, but he does let his audience know that double speak is an effective rhetoric to use in certain circumstances.
The idea of euphemism is to sugar coat an instance. This can be used by simple diction or a whole statement. It is up to the writer to choose his/her method. Lutz leaves the choice to the audience, but provides certain examples to let the audience be informed with the affect of euphemism in a statement. In essence, he provides short and precise examples by comparing a straightforward statement with a doublespeak statement. He informs the reader that euphemism is a rhetoric that creates vagueness in a blunt statement. In my opinion, Lutz did a fine job. The omission of any statements will leave the essay vague and blank, in a sense.
Secondly, Lutz explains and defines jargon to be a prestigious type language to impress and inform an audience. Many of the high class workers use this rhetoric in their professions to make a good impression. In essence, a jargon can be used in a hospital, court, or any other professional environment. Lutz provides the reader with positives and negatives regarding this rhetoric. He informs his reader to be well aware of using such rhetoric. The examples provided are precise and clear cut. In essence,