TCCD Mother Tongue Two Ways Of Looking At A River The Irish Famine The five journal entries are due on Wednesday, November 20, at the beginning of class. I

TCCD Mother Tongue Two Ways Of Looking At A River The Irish Famine The five journal entries are due on Wednesday, November 20, at the beginning of class. If you submit those entries when you return from Thanksgiving Break on December 2, twenty points will be deducted from your grade. Do not submit these entries to Safe Assign. Submit the five entries in a folder.

Each entry must be a minimum of two-thirds of a page. The entries must have a heading (MLA style), a title (not the title of the essay), a topic sentence in which you include the author’s name and the title of the essay. The body of each paragraph must integrate one quote from the essay. Each entry must be typed in the MLA style and use correct grammar and punctuation. Check for fragments, comma splices, fused sentences, and sentences that are not clearly worded.

The first entry is your reaction to Amy Tan’s “Mother Tongue,” pp. 697-703.

The second entry is Mark Twain’s “Two Ways of Looking at a River,” a handout. In this entry your are to write your own experience of gaining something, but losing something in return.

The third entry is “The Irish Famine,” a handout. In this entry you are to discuss the side that you believe is right–the Irish or the British. Remember that you must give your reasons.

The fourth entry is “Neat People vs. Sloppy People,” a handout. In this entry give the reasons why you consider yourself a neat person, a sloppy person, or both a neat and sloppy person. You must give several examples.

The fifth entry is argumentative. You may choose one of the following essays: Joanna McKay’s “Organ Sales Will Save Lives,” pp. 157-162; Nicholas Kristof,’s “Our Blind Spot about Guns,” pp.162-165; Molly Worthen’s “U Can’t Talk to Ur Professor Like This,” pp.165-170. In this entry, your assignment to to discuss why you agree or disagree with the essay. AA COMMONLIT
Names
Class:
Two Ways of Looking at A River
By Mark Twain
1883
Samuel Clemens (1835-19101 best known by his pen name Mark Twain, was an American author and
humorist Twain was raised in Missouri and worked for some years as a riverboat pilot on the Mississippi
River. The following passage is taken from Life on the Mississippi (1887), memoir of his days osa
steamboar pilor before the American Civil War. As you read, take notes on Twain’s use of imagery and how it
changes throughout the passage
Now when I had mastered the language of this
water and had come to know every trilling
feature that bordered the great river as familiarly
as I knew the letters of the alphabet, I had made
a valuable acquisition. But I had lost something
too. I had lost something which could never be
restored to me while I lived. All the grace, the
beauty, the poetry, had gone out the majestic
river I still kept in mind a certain wonderful
sunset which I witnessed when steamboating was
new to me. A broad expanse of the river was “Sunset and Paddle Boatweby Vamprove is licensed
turned to blood; in the middle distance the red
under CC BY-NC-ND 20.
hue brightened into gold, through which a
solitary log came floating, black and conspicuous; in one place a long slanting mark lay sparkling upon
the water, in another the surface was broken by boiling tumbling rings that were as many-tinted as an
opal; where the ruddy flush was falntest was a smooth spot that was covered with graceful circles and
radiating lines, ever so delicately traced; the shore on our left was densely wooded, and the somber
shadow that fell from this forest was broken in one place by a long, ruffled trail that shone like silver,
and high above the forest wall a clean-stemmed dead tree waved a single leafy bough that glowed like
a flame in the unobstructed splendor that was flowing from the sun. There were graceful curves,
reflected images woody heights, soft distances, and over the whole scene, far and near, the dissolving
lights drifted steadily, enriching it every passing moment with new marvels of coloring.
1. Trifling ſadjective: lacking in significance or value
2 Acquisition found something gained or acquired
Somber adjective: dark and gloomy of a serious and/or sad cast
Bouchino
COMMONLIT
I stood like one bewitched. I drank it in, in a speechless rapture. The world was new to me and I had
never seen anything like this at home. But as I have said, a day came when I began to cease from
noting the glories and the charms which the moon and the sun and the twilight wrought upon the
river’s face, another day came when I ceased altogether to note them. Then, if that sunset scene had
been repeated, I should have looked upon in without rapture and should have commented upon it
inwardly after this fashion “This sun means that we are going to have wind tomorrow, that floating log
means that the river is rising small thanks to it that slanting mark on the water refers to a bluff reef
which is going to kill somebody’s steamboat one of these nights, if it keeps on stretching out like that:
those tumbling bolls’ show a dissolving bar and a changing channel there, the lines and circles in the
stick water over yonder are a warning that that troublesome place is shoaling up dangerous, that
silver streak in the shadow of the forest is the break from a new snag and he has located himself in
the very best place he could have found to fish for steamboats, that tall dead tree, with a single living
branch is not going to last long and then how is a body ever going to get through this blind place at
night without the friendly old landmark?”
No, the romance and beauty were all gone from the river. All the value any feature of it had for me
now was the amount of usefulness it could furnish toward compassing the safe piloting of a
steamboat. Since those days, I have pitied doctors from my heart. What does the lovely flush in a
beauty’s cheek mean to a doctor but a “break that ripples above some deadly disease? Are not all her
visible charms sown thick with what are to him the sign and symbols of hidden decay? Does he ever
see her beauty at all, or doesn’t he simply view her professionally and comment upon her
unwholesome condition all to himself? And doesn’t he sometimes wonder whether he had gained
most or lost most by learning his trade?
Two Ways of Looking at River by Mark Twain is in the public domain.
5. Shoal verb to become shallow
Neat People vs. Sloppy People
“Neat People vs. Sloppy People” appears in Britt’s collection show and tell. Mingling
humor with seriousness (as she often does), Britt has called the book a report on her
journey into the awful cave of self. You shout your name and voices come back in
exultant response, telling you their names. In this essay about curtain inescapable
personality traits, you may recognize some aspects of your own self, awful or otherwise.
For a different approach to a similar subject, see the next essay, by Dave Barry.
I’ve finally figured out the difference between neat people and sloppy people. The
distinction is, as always, moral. Neat people are lazier and meaner than sloppy people.
Sloppy people, you see, are not really sloppy. Their sloppiness is merely the
unfortunate consequence of their extreme moral rectitude. Sloppy people carry in their
mind’s eye a heavenly vision, a precise plan, that is so stupendous, so perfect, it can’t be
achieved in this world or the next
Sloppy people live in Never-Never land. Someday is their Métier. Someday they
are planning to alphabetize all their books and set up home catalogs. Someday they will
go through their wardrobes and mark curtain items for tentative mending and curtain
items for passing on to relatives of similar shape ands size. Someday sloppy people will
make family scrapbooks into which they will out newspaper clippings, postcards, lock of
hair, and the dried corsage from their senior prom. Someday they will file everything on
the surface of their decks, including the cash receipt from coffee purchases at the snack
shack. Someday they will sit down and read all the back issues of The New Yorker.
For all these noble reason and more, sloppy people never get neat. They aim to
high and wide. They save everything, planning someday to file, order, and straighten out
the world. But while these ambitious plans take clearer and clearer shape in there heads,
the books spill from the shelves into the floor, the clothes pile up in the hamper and
closet, the family mementos accumulate in every drawer, the surface of the desk is buried
under mounds of people and the unread magazine threaten to reach the ceiling.
Sloppy people can’t bear to part with anything. They give loving attention to
every detail. When sloppy people say they’re going to tackle the surface of the desk, they
really mean it. Not a paper will go unturned, not a rubber band will go unboxed. Four
hours or two weeks into the excavation, the desk looks exactly the same, primarily
because the sloppy person is meticulously creating new piles of paper with new headings
and scrupulously stopping to read all the old book catalogs before he threw them away. A
neat person would just bulldoze the desk.
Neat people are bums and clods at heart. They have cavalier attitude toward
possession, including the family heirlooms. Everything is just another dust catcher to
them. If anything collects dust, it’s got to go and that’s that. Neat people will toy with the
idea of throwing the children out of the house just to cut down on the clutter.
Neat people don’t care about process. They like results. What they want to do is
get the whole thing over with so they can sit down and watch the rasslin’ on TV. Neat
people operate on two unvarying principles: Never handle any items twice, and throw
everything away.
Neat People vs. Sloppy People
“Neat People vs. Sloppy People” appears in Britt’s collection show and tell. Mingling
humor with seriousness (as she often does), Britt has called the book a report on her
journey into the awful cave of self. You shout your name and voices come back in
exultant response, telling you their names. In this essay about curtain inescapable
personality traits, you may recognize some aspects of your own self, awful or otherwise.
For a different approach to a similar subject, see the next essay, by Dave Barry.
I’ve finally figured out the difference between neat people and sloppy people. The
distinction is, as always, moral. Neat people are lazier and meaner than sloppy people.
Sloppy people, you see, are not really sloppy. Their sloppiness is merely the
unfortunate consequence of their extreme moral rectitude. Sloppy people carry in their
mind’s eye a heavenly vision, a precise plan, that is so stupendous, so perfect, it can’t be
achieved in this world or the next
Sloppy people live in Never-Never land. Someday is their Métier. Someday they
are planning to alphabetize all their books and set up home catalogs. Someday they will
go through their wardrobes and mark curtain items for tentative mending and curtain
items for passing on to relatives of similar shape ands size. Someday sloppy people will
make family scrapbooks into which they will out newspaper clippings, postcards, lock of
hair, and the dried corsage from their senior prom. Someday they will file everything on
the surface of their decks, including the cash receipt from coffee purchases at the snack
shack. Someday they will sit down and read all the back issues of The New Yorker.
For all these noble reason and more, sloppy people never get neat. They aim to
high and wide. They save everything, planning someday to file, order, and straighten out
the world. But while these ambitious plans take clearer and clearer shape in there heads,
the books spill from the shelves into the floor, the clothes pile up in the hamper and
closet, the family mementos accumulate in every drawer, the surface of the desk is buried
under mounds of people and the unread magazine threaten to reach the ceiling.
Sloppy people can’t bear to part with anything. They give loving attention to
every detail. When sloppy people say they’re going to tackle the surface of the desk, they
really mean it. Not a paper will go unturned, not a rubber band will go unboxed. Four
hours or two weeks into the excavation, the desk looks exactly the same, primarily
because the sloppy person is meticulously creating new piles of paper with new headings
and scrupulously stopping to read all the old book catalogs before he threw them away. A
neat person would just bulldoze the desk.
Neat people are bums and clods at heart. They have cavalier attitude toward
possession, including the family heirlooms. Everything is just another dust catcher to
them. If anything collects dust, it’s got to go and that’s that. Neat people will toy with the
idea of throwing the children out of the house just to cut down on the clutter.
Neat people don’t care about process. They like results. What they want to do is
get the whole thing over with so they can sit down and watch the rasslin’ on TV. Neat
people operate on two unvarying principles: Never handle any items twice, and throw
everything away.
The Irish Famine
The Irish famine, which brought hardship and tragedy to Ireland during the
1840s was caused and prolonged by four basic factors: the failure of the potato
crop, the landlord -tenant system, errors in government policy, and the long-
standing prejudice of the British toward Ireland.
The immediate cause of the famine was the failure of the potato crop. In
1845, potato disease struck the crop, and potatoes rotted in the ground. The
1846 crop also failed, and before long people were eating weeds. The 1847 crop
was healthy, but there was not enough potatoes to go around, and in 1848 the
blight struck again, leading to more and more evictions of tenants by landlords.
The tenants’ position on the land had never been very secure. Most had no
leases and could be turned out by their landlords at any time. If a tenant owed
rent, he was evicted or worse, put in prison, leaving his family to starve. The
threat of prison caused many tenants to leave their land; those who could leave
Ireland did so, sometimes with money provided by their landlords. Some
landlords did try to take care of their tenants, but most did not. Many were
absentee landlords who spent their money abroad.
Government policy errors, although not an immediate cause of the famine,
played an important role in creating an unstable economy and perpetuating
starvation. In 1846, the government decided not to continue selling corn, as it
had during the first year of the famine, claiming that low-cost purchases of corn,
articles/24500-1.asp. Accessed 30 Nov. 2008
Radcliffe-Richards, J., et al. “The Case for Allowing Kidney Sales.-
The Lancet, vol. 351, no. 9120, 27 June 1998, pp. 1950-52.
ment appeals to her readers’ sense of fairness; when kidney sales are
MacKay clearly states her position at the beginning of her text: “Goverruments
should not ban the sale of human organs; they should regulate it.” Her arge
and regulated, both sellers and buyers will benefit from the transaction. She
legaliai
uses MLA style to document her sources.
NICHOLAS KRISTOF
Our Blind Spot about Guns
In this essay, which first appeared in the New York Times in 2014, columnis
Nicholas Kristof argues that if guns and their owners were regulated in the same
way that cars and their drivers are, thousands of lives could be saved each year,
If we had the same auto fatality rate today that we had in 1921, by
my calculations we would have 715,200 Americans dying annually in
vehicle accidents.
Instead, we’ve reduced the fatality rate by more than 95 percent-
not by confiscating cars, but by regulating them and their drivers sensibly.
We could have said, “Cars don’t kill people. People kill people,
and there would have been an element of truth to that. Many accidents
are a result of alcohol consumption, speeding, road rage or driver
distraction. Or we could have said, “It’s pointless because even if you
regulate cars, then people will just run each other down with bicycles.”
and that, too, would have been partly true.
Tan/Mother Tongue
AMY TAN
Mother Tongue
How
Is that
not?
signiyat |
this
does it
Amy Tan (b. 1952) is the author of novels, children’s books, essays, and
a memoir. Her work has appeared in the New Yorker, National Geo-
graphic, and other magazines. She is best known for her novel The Joy
Luck Club (1989), which examines the lives of and the relationships
between four Chinese American daughters and their mothers. The fol-
lowing selection was first delivered as a talk at a symposium on lan-
guage in San Francisco in 1989. As you read, pay attention to how Tan
describes the different Englishes she speaks.
I AM NOT A SCHOLAR OF ENGLISH OR LITERATURE. I cannot give you much
more than personal opinions on the English language and its variations
in this country or others.
I am a writer. And by that definition, I am someone who has always
loved language. I am fascinated by language in daily life. I spend a great
deal of my time thinking about the power of language — the way it can
evoke an emotion, a visual image, a complex idea, or a simple truth.
Language is the tool of my trade. And I use them all — all the Englishes
I grew up with
Recently, I was made keenly aware of the different Englishes I do
use. I was giving a talk to a large group of people, the same talk I had
already given to half a dozen other groups. The nature of the talk was
about my writing, my life, and my book, The Joy Luck Club. The talk was
going along well enough, until I remembered one major difference that
made the whole talk sound wrong. My mother was in the room. And
it was perhaps the first time she had heard me give a lengthy speech,
One
die
.
using the kind of English I have never used with her. I was saying things
like, “The intersection of memory upon imagination” and “There is an
aspect of my fiction that relates to thus-and-thus”-a speech filled with
carefully wrought grammatical phrases, burdened, it suddenly seemed to
me, with nominalized forms, past perfect tenses, conditional phrases, all
the forms of standard English that I had learned in school and through
books, the forms of English I did not use at home with my mother
4
The Irish famine, one of the great tragedies of the nineteenth century,
was a natural disaster compounded by the insensitivity of the British
government and the archaic agricultural system of Ireland. Although the
deaths that resulted depleted Ireland’s resources even more, the men and
women who immigrated to other countries permanently enriched those nations.
Ireland pay for its own poor, and so it forced the collection of taxes. Since
many landlords just did not have the tax money, they were forced to evict their
tenants. The British government’s callous and indifferent treatment of the Irish
has been called genocide.
As a result of this devastating famine, the population of Ireland was
reduced from about nine million to about six and one-half million. During the
famine years, men roamed the streets looking for work, begging when they
found none. Epidemics of “famine fever” and dysentery reduced the
population drastically. The most important historical result of the famine,
however, was the massive immigration to the United States, Canada, and
Great Britain of poor, unskilled people who had to struggle to fit into a skilled
economy and who brought with them a deep-seated hatred of the British. (This
same hatred remained strong in Ireland itself-so strong that at the time of
World War II, Ireland, then independent, remained neutral rather than coming
to England’s aid.) Irish immigrants faced slums, fever epidemics, joblessness,
and hostility-even anti-Catholic and anti-Irish riots-in Boston, New York,
London, Glasgow, and Quebec. In Ireland itself, poverty and discontent
continued, and by 1848 those emigrating from Ireland included a more highly
skilled class of farmer, the ones Ireland needed to recover and to survive.
articles/24500-1.asp. Accessed 30 Nov. 2008
Radcliffe-Richards, J., et al. “The Case for Allowing Kidney Sales.-
The Lancet, vol. 351, no. 9120, 27 June 1998, pp. 1950-52.
ment appeals to her readers’ sense of fairness; when kidney sales are
MacKay clearly states her position at the beginning of her text: “Goverruments
should not ban the sale of human organs; they should regulate it.” Her arge
and regulated, both sellers and buyers will benefit from the transaction. She
legaliai
uses MLA style to document her sources.
NICHOLAS KRISTOF
Our Blind Spot about Guns
In this essay, which first appeared in the New York Times in 2014, columnis
Nicholas Kristof argues that if guns and their owners were regulated in the same
way that cars and their drivers are, thousands of lives could be saved each year,
If we had the same auto fatality rate today that we had in 1921, by
my calculations we would have 715,200 Americans dying annually in
vehicle accidents.
Instead, we’ve reduced the fatality rate by more than 95 percent-
not by confiscating cars, but by regulating them and their drivers sensibly.
We could have said, “Cars don’t kill people. People kill people,
and there would have been an element of truth to that. Many accidents
are a result of alcohol consumption, speeding, road rage or driver
distraction. Or we could have said, “It’s pointless because even if you
regulate cars, then people will just run each other down with bicycles.”
and that, too, would have been partly true.
Tan/Mother Tongue
AMY TAN
Mother Tongue
How
Is that
not?
signiyat |
this
does it
Amy Tan (b. 1952) is the author of novels, children’s books, essays, and
a memoir. Her work has appeared in the New Yorker, National Geo-
graphic, and other magazines. She is best known for her novel The Joy
Luck Club (1989), which examines the lives of and the relationships
between four Chinese American daughters and their mothers. The fol-
lowing…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment