1. When reading the first few words of the article, one can see that Chavez's intent is to show that civility in dealing with society will be the prevailing theme of the article. However, when reading the remainder of the article and contrasting that with the first few words, another layer of meaning is added. Chavez wants us to question the true meaning of civility-what is and is not considered civil language.
2. The word bellicose in this context means aggressive or hostile. In this article, Chavez uses this term to reveal the contradictions that politicians speak in their line of work. Politicians repeatedly preach political correctness and try not to offend with words and yet they use aggressively hostile metaphors to ridicule their opponents and win campaigns.
3. Chavez is trying to persuade that it is very much possible to eloquently debate with others and express your opinions with language while still being civil. Chavez brings up a very good point to support her belief. She writes of the recent debate about taking the "N word" out of Huck Finn and how this could "distort the author's intent and interferes with the reader's understanding." This example best defends her opinion because it shows that it is not the literal words, but the intent behind them, than can either greatly strengthen your debate or hurt others.
4. I agree with Chavez because most people aren't able to strongly debate and express their opinion without using derogatory or hurtful words.
the point you bring up about expressing your opinion while still using civil language is important because many people express their opinion without using civil language and it is important to remember to use civil language.
ReplyDelete