The English Language- The New Generation

Language is something that the human race can not live without. Without the English language, we would not be able to communicate with each other and we would not have gotten this far into civilization. People take many different forms of the way to speak within their language. The most well-known language used worldwide is the English language. The English language has been abused by many people and it has been adopted by many to be switched up from what it really should be. In George Orwell's speech, "Politics and the English Language," he analyzes the many factors in which the English language has been misused all over the world.

George Orwell's main points about written and spoken English are that humans are the ones who  make the English language seem as he says, "ugly and inaccurate," because we become too careless and lazy with our language and speech. Our language, as George Orwell states, creates foolish thoughts within us. In a sense, our foolish thoughts inhibited by our language can be erased. 

Back to his point, George Orwell states that our English language started on its own and that eventually over time, it developed and grew on its own without any input from the human race. We did not 'shape' our language, but we have supposedly 'damaged' our version of the English language.

I have to disagree with the fact that English developed on its own and that we as a collective race had nothing to do with it. "...the half-conscience belief that language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes." If it was not for us building on to the English language, then there would be no form of communication today. Although we have created the English language, George Orwell does have a point when he says that we have permanently damaged what we now consider to be the English language. George Orwell speaks of the Modern English which can be examined through the lives of everyday teenagers.  

Nowadays, we hear kids speaking in a manner in which people did not use to speak like before. This is an example from Orwell's' speech and how he says  that we have done so much damage to the English language that it is irreversible. We, as teenagers have the most informal language. Teenagers do not care what they say or who they say it to. In a sense, teenagers learn to speak their mind from a very early age and over time, they seem to not put a censor on the things that they speak of. They have a tendency to use foul language or as we know it 'cuss words'. I have met a lot of teenagers who must use as cuss word in every sentence in order for them to speak comfortably. For every two words, there is a cuss word. 

I can speak from experience. I am not so good with censoring my thoughts and covering up every cuss word that gets thrown out of my mouth. It is a bad habit and that is exactly what George Orwell speaks about.

Another example is the way teenagers seem to just make up some words. When I walk down the street, I hear so many people speak without them using the English language properly. People, specifically teenagers, use made up words such as "Bruh", "Dude", "N***a", and so on and so forth.

Also, we have sites such as Urban Dictionary, which transform a normal English word into something completely different. Although it is taken as a joke to many people, it does put a dent in the many years that humans have developed for the English language.

If we were to go back in time, we would see that no one would speak the way we do now. We have changed our language drastically. I wouldn't say that we have destroyed the English language, but we definitely have damaged it in some way.

Rebuttal for Carly

In Carlys' opening statement  of her debate topic that she chose, which was the same as mine, Should child actors in shows marketed to younger audiences be expected to serve as role models for people their age?, Carly does have some strong points that I can not disagree with. But at the same time, her thesis or her strongest point was that the child stars should not be role models simply because it strips them of their freedom and that is something I disagree with. 

"The main and most important reason that child actors should not be required to be role models is because it would strip the actors of their freedom."

I agree with her statement that certain child stars should not be role models to younger kids, but at the same time, it has nothing to do with stripping them of their freedom. It is mostly for them knowing what is and what is not the right thing to do when they know that millions of people worldwide can be viewing them 24/7.

"Everybody has done something bad, either by accident or on purpose. Actors' mistakes and faults are magnified and the results are painful to endure when everyone turns against you. Even though Miley Cyrus has committed something inappropriate for teens her age, she should be given the opportunity to learn from her mistakes, just like others are too. Furthermore, if Miley had not learned from her mistakes and commit it multiple times over, who are we- the audience, to tell her to stop? It is true that our youngsters are influenced by her, but they are also influenced by many other kids at school."

Carly is trying to say that we should let the child stars live freely and we, as an audience are not one to judge. Personally, if I had a child, I would not want them to be viewing the disastrous lives of many of the child stars. Yes, Carly is right when she says that we should give stars such as Miley Cyrus the opportunity to learn from their mistakes and that we should give them some space. But I think that they should not have done their mistakes in the first place. It is not like the mistakes that these stars did were too small notice. No! They were a very big deal. For example, Miley Cyrus had recently released some naked pictures of herself and her character in the music industry is not one that should be an advertisement for kids half her age. Child stars turn in to some of the worst people that should supposedly be role models for our generation of kids.

 

 

Child Actors!

Should child actors in shows marketed to younger audiences be expected to serve as role models for people their age?
Yes! Young actors should be able to hold themselves to a higher standard instead of falling through the cracks when they know that younger kids look up to them.


There are many young actors in Hollywood who know how to hold themselves together since they know that they are advertising to an audience who should not have to witness them behaving badly. On the other hand, there are the Disney stars who show up on T.V or in magazines doing things that they shouldn't be doing. For example, now on Disney, we have teenage girls such as Miley Cyrus and Demi Lovato. Miley Cyrus has a history of repeatedly behaving what other people consider bad for their children to view. She showed up in an issue of Vanity Fair, she dated men that were over the age of 18 while she was still a minor, her music videos are too provocative and she pole danced at the 2009 Teen Choice Awards. All this behavior is something that parents would not approve of their child viewing. As for Demi Lovato, she ended up going to rehab for cutting herself. That is also a thing where parents do not want their kids to learn of that kind of stuff.


Both of these young ladies have had their pictures leaked on to the Internet, where they are exposed or there are racy pictures of them. Either they should learn how to have more respect for both themselves and the company that they work for, or in my opinion, they should not be allowed to be in the industry at all. When these girls show up anywhere where their names are being headlined for something wrong that they did, the parents of younger children do not want them to have to witness that for the purpose of keeping them from even learning about those type of stuff that should be left for the adults. If child stars such as Miley Cyrus and Demi Lovato want to act more grown up o taken more seriously by a wider range of audience, the they should be on Disney Channel where there are millions of kids viewing them worldwide.

Animal Farm

Political power always finds a way to corrupt those who get the opportunity to attain it. People who fight for what they believe in take extreme measures to obtain what it is that they are rebelling for. In the end, those rebels become the leaders that are just like their old dictator or even worse. Everyone, even without admitting it know that if they were handed over the power to control something, they would not even have to think about it; before we know it, they will become tyrants.

This does not always happen, only to certain people. When democracy gives the people the right to vote for whom they want as their leader, they should pick wisely. Whomever it is that gets handed power over their people either choose to be tyrannical or not.

There was a quote that mentioned how even when the animals take over the farm for themselves, they should never become anything like their tyrant: the humans.

"And remember also that in fighting against Man, we must not come to resemble him. Even when you have conquered him, do not adopt his vices...And, above all, no animal must ever tyrannies over his own kind. Weak of strong, cleaver or simple, we are all brothers. No animal must ever kill any other animal. All animals are equal." (31).  

Although the animals say that they will not become anything like the human and that they will not adopt the humans ways, it is impossible to believe that they won't.


I think George Orwell would answer this question by saying yes, political power does corrupt people. In the first chapters of Animal Farm, we can already tell of who will become the dictators of the new animal farm: the pigs.  Since the pigs were the ones who actually followed through with the plan of taking over the farm for themselves, they automatically became the superior ones above all the rest of the animals. The rest of the animals on the farm think of the pigs as the most intellectual ones out of all of them and for that reason, they are the leaders of their newly formed democracy. Most likely, later on in the book, we will see how this power will turn into a dictatorship.

Political power should be taken very seriously, but not in a way where the leader becomes one who was just as bad as the old leader.

Are Elite Colleges Even Important?

When it comes down to choosing a college for any student, it becomes somewhat of a challenge to select the best college out there. People seem to think that if you go to an elite college, you will somehow have a better life, while others tend to disagree. Between seven debates, I came to a conclusion that there was one response that was the most persuasive and one that did not seem to persuade me as much as the rest.

The response that stood out to me the most was "Skip the Admissions Game" by Kevin Carey. He states that if you have the money to go to an elite college, then it wouldn't be such a bad idea to attend, but if you simply just don't have the money, it's okay if you do not attend an elite college.

"If you're among the small handful of students who have stellar SAT scores and parents with several hundred thousand dollars to spend, you should seriously consider going to an elite college or university... But most students -- about four out of five -- attend colleges that have modest resources, are easy to get into, and are relatively obscure. Lacking any other way to distinguish among these choices, these students usually attend whichever college is cheapest and closest to home."

It only makes sense that if you are lucky enough to attend an elite college, that you should go, no question asked. But if you can't for financial reasons, then it's not the end of the world. Elite schools will only look good for instance, on a job application, but at a non-elite college, students might get the same education.

The response that was the least persuasive to me was "The Specialization Trade-Off" by James Shulman. To me, he honestly made points that were irrelevant to the subject. He mentioned sports which I thought was unimpressive.

But if you’re a school that is trying to beat Yale in swimming, then selecting someone on the basis of her potential in the 100-meter butterfly is a rational investment for the college; the trade-off is that although recruited athletes will go on to have great opportunities, they are likely to perform academically below what their preparation would predict.

The question was not asking about sports being incorporated in elite colleges. Shulman could have made a stronger debate if he would have stayed on the subject instead of heading off into another direction speaking of sports.

Response to Stan's Response!

Stan responded to my blog post about guys and girls. I liked many of the points that he made while at the same time, I had to disagree.

 Girls do need to look good at first to get the guy but then after a while guys begin to just care about the girl and not care if shes wearing make up or not. For example me: In the beginning of my relationship I kind of liked it when my girlfriend wore make-up, now I think shes more beautiful as a person with out it, she isn't hiding behind mascara and all that other powdery stuff on her face, its the real her.  

And that's why guys have the hard end of the deal.

I totally agree with Stan's first quote. He went through the same thing that me and my boyfriend somewhat went through, to say the least. Stan says that we he first started going out with his girlfriend, he wanted her to look good as in wearing makeup, but after a while, he began to see her as more beautiful when she exposes her natural beauty. Makeup and the fact that many people think that the ideal girl has to have makeup in order to look beautiful is what our culture has come down to. We as a collective group have seen that more and more woman have been persuaded to make themselves look beautiful in order to be liked, but as Stan said, it's really mostly the inner beauty that counts the most. I used to wear makeup around my boyfriend all the time, but I recently learned that he doesn't care whether I do or not since he loves me unconditionally. He thinks that I look good both ways. He tells me that he likes me, like Drake says, "Sweatpants, hair tie, chillin' with no makeup on." So the fact of the matter is that without makeup, we are able to see one another as their true self.

I have to disagree with the second quote simply because I still have my opinions and I honestly think that the girls still have it harder in the current society that we are in. The only things that guys have to worry about, in my opinion, is the fear of either rejection or being dumped at the end, leaving them heartbroken. I'm not saying that guys do not get hurt in certain relationship and that girls are the only victims, but I have seen more girls end their relationship with a broken heart than many guys I know.

The only way that the different genders were to be able to understand what the others go through is to switch positions.

Free Write- Stan Anderson, You Better Read This!

A while ago during P.E, Stan and I were having an interesting conversation. Out of those many topics that we were discussing, this one emerged and struck me the most: the fascination of how it’s easier for girls to get guys than for guys to get the girls.

According to Stan, “Girls have it so easy, dude! All the girls have to do is show off a little bit and that’s it. Guys have to work hard to get the girls!”

In some weird way, I agree and disagree with Stan’s epiphany, as he calls it. He did make some good points, but there are still ways in which he is wrong.

I agree because in the society we live in, it is rare for a girl to go up to a guy and ask them out. Girls are used to being approached by the guys and asked out. Guys do have to work hard. They are the ones who have to work up the nerve to even go up to the girls that they like and have the guts to ask them out. Even if most guys will disagree with me, they do stress over this process. There are guys out there who are very arrogant and they just get the girls out there, but other guys are timid and they are the ones who will most likely have it hard to get the girl they want. So if we really take a close look at modern day society, especially high school, we will see that ‘getting girls’ is a tough thing to do for some guys.

At the same time, I have to disagree with my conversation with Stan. Girls have to have it hard too. We are the ones who have to work hard to look nice in order for us to get noticed by the guys that we like. We take time out of our daily lives stressing over our appearances. It takes an hour or more to get ready. We have to deal with the clothes we wear, the shoes that match the outfit, the make-up, the hair, etc. We always have in mind that we have to look good for the guys and it is stressful for us if the guy that we like likes someone else. Stan says that all we have to do is show off our assets a little bit and that’s it, but in reality, it is so much harder than just that.

I guess I have to say that both guys and girls have it hard since there is that factor of rejection. Guys are scared to ask out the girl that they want and get rejected. As for the girls, they are scared that if they are the bold who do ask the guys out, that they will be rejected as well.