Li 1

Jintian Li
Professor Bryan Kopp
ENG 313
13 May 2015
Noticing Different Prose Style Strategies and Ways of Expressing the Similar Ideas
In our lives, there are so many writing genres that we may or may not be conscious of. For
example, the genre of movie reviews. Have you ever noticed the reviews of the same movies that
are different on Netflix, in a newspaper, or in a magazine? Another example, may be the topic of
love. Have you noticed the readings you read about love in your biochemistry class are different
from fairy tales? We might expect the same topic to be presented differently in various genres,
but even within the same genre, authors use prose style strategies differently and use different
ways of conveying the similar ideas. Have you ever noticed those differences? I will study
academic writings in the field of English Studies to analyze those differences by using two
examples to assist us in finding the answers.
The first example is Sledds Grammar for Social Awareness in Time of Class Warfare. James
Sledd author of Grammar for Social Awareness in Time of Class Warfare was published by
English Journal in Illinois in 1996. The subtitle of the journal is that the journal of the secondary
section of the national council of teachers of English. It is very obvious that English Journal is
for English studies, and its target audiences are teachers of English. National council means
the journal opens to a national level. So, those targeting teachers are probably from elementary
school to college in United Sates. English Journal says James Sledd is a professor emeritus of
English at the University of Texas, Austin (63). So, Sledds writing for English Journal is

Li 2
academic writing. In the text I choose, Sledd expresses the idea that Standard English and AAVE
(nonstandard English) should be treated equally. The second example is Berlins Rhetorics,
Poetics, and Cultures: Refiguring College English Studies. This one is a book called Rhetorics,
Poetics, and Cultures: Refiguring College English Studies published by Parlor Press at West
Lafayette in 2003. Berlin is the author of this book. He was a theorist known for his rhetoric and
composition theory. As the title states, this book is for college English studies, the same genre as
Sledds. The audience or users tend to be English scholars, English teachers and English major
college students, especially college writing teachers and college English writing major students.
The audience are at the higher educational level than most readers of Sledds text. The book also
falls under academic writing. Berlin expresses a deconstructive idea that the meaning of a
signified is equal to its opposite meaning in a binary relation, which is similar to Sledds idea that
Standard English and AAVE (nonstandard English) should be treated equally. We also see that
both of their writings are for English studies. In other words, they are under the same genre.
The following is a piece chosen from Sledds writing. Lets see what prose style
strategies are employed.
It is the language used with approval by the privileged and powerful, the language
which they demand of aspirants to power and privilege, though they themselves may not have
fully mastered it. Its use comes easiest to those who have grown up among its users (those pupils
whom teachers and grammar and usage find consequently most receptive). To the weak and
unprivileged, it is an alien dialect, basically like their own disfavored variety of English, but
differing in hard-to-learn details which commonly strike the frustrated learner as insignificant
(60).

Li 3
According to readability test, the average grade level is 15.7 and the flesch-kincaid
reading ease is 43.8, which means difficult and academic. The data illustrates that readers who
can understand the text are required to reach the educational level that is at least at the 15.7th
grade. The sentences from above are complicated. The first sentence It is the language used
with approval by the privileged and powerful, the language which they demand of aspirants to
power and privilege, though they themselves may not have fully mastered it is pretty long.
Which they demand of aspirants to power and privilege is a relative clause that adds more
details about what the language is. The language is repeated after an intervening phrase. This is
diacope. Though is subordination as the function to make the first sentence longer and more
complicated. Prepositions are also used, such as, with and by. Those strategies make the whole
sentence verbose and unspeakable, which are characteristics of official styles. Lets look at
another sentence: To the weak and unprivileged, it is an alien dialect, basically like their own
disfavored variety of English, but differing in hard-to-learn details which commonly strike the
frustrated learner as insignificant. It starts with a prepositional phrase: to the weak and
unprivileged. But is coordination. A relative clause is used again: which commonly
leaner. By looking at the whole sentence, it is complex, verbose, and unspeakable. We also see
that the ideas of the sentence are ordered in increasing importance. This is a rhetorical device-climax. The idea after but is the most important one because but is a transition that draws
peoples attention to read what following an author will say. As we see, the official style
strategies, rhetoric devices and sentence-combining strategies are widely used, which make the
text credible and really sound academic.
The following is one example I chose from Berlins text. Lets see what prose styles are
used.

Li 4
One of the most obvious features of the employment picture today is the decreasing
number of jobs in manufacturing and the increasing number in the service sector. The vast
majority of the latter fall into the two unstable employment tiers and offer few attractions for
most workers In flexible accumulation, markets are as much created as they are identified and
so "control over information flow and over the vehicles for propagation of public taste and
culture have likewise become vital weapons in competitive struggle" (Harvey 1989, 160)
(Berlin, 2003).
After pasting the piece at the Readability-Score.com website, the result shows that the
Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease is 27.3, which is low, and the average grade level is 16.2, which is
a high level to public readers. This data indicates that this text is not easy for the public to read.
People who can understand the text totally or at least mainly, are required to achieve the
educational level at least at 16.2 grade. Lets look at the text closely. At the first sentence One
of the most obvious features of the employment picture today is the decreasing number of jobs in
manufacturing and the increasing number in the service sector, the subject One of the most
obvious features of the employment picture today is very long and is embellished by many
words by using prepositions. This is euphemistic, verbose and slow sentence opening that are
three of the features of official style. The first sentence also uses the exemplum of rhetorical
devices. This strategy means providing a concrete example. In this sentence, the decreasing
number of jobs in manufacturing and the increasing number in the service sector is the specific
example of one of the most obvious features of the employment picture. This sentence also use
hyperbole that exaggerates the importance of something. One of the most obvious features
emphasizes the importance of the decreasing number of jobs. The most presents the extreme
degree of obvious. At the first and second sentences, prepositional phrases are widely used, for

Li 5
example, One of the most of the number of jobs in and the in the. Here are eight
prepositional phrases, which make these sentences longer. The second sentence uses
coordination. And connects the first part and the second part into one sentence. Whats more,
fall and offer share the same subject the vast majority of latter, which is parataxis that
clauses are equally emphasized.
I would like to analyze the last sentence. In flexible accumulation, markets are as much
created as they are identified and so "control over information flow and over the vehicles for
propagation of public taste and culture have likewise become vital weapons in competitive
struggle. In flexible accumulation- a prepositional phrase - appears again. According to the
readability test, Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease is pretty low, only 6.9, much lower than that of the
whole paragraph. The Average Grade Level is 20, also higher than that of the whole paragraph.
The words per sentence is 37! This might be very hard for most readers even college students.
Markets are as much created is passive voice, which shows the official style again. Looking at
the whole sentence roughly, we can see there are three and coordinating different short
sentences. The strategy used here is what we call Polysyndeton that is opposite to Asyndeton, but
it also demonstrates the effect of multiplicity, energetic enumeration, and building up. Besides
and, lets look at this sentence closely, and then we will see these prepositions: in.asas
overforofin and thats why this sentence is long, shapeless and unreadable.
As we have seen so far, even though sentence-combining strategies are largely used in
both examples, such as relative clause and prepositional phrases, rhetorical devices are used
differently. In Sledds piece, diacope and climax are used, which cannot be found in Berlins
piece. In Berlins, exemplum and hyperbole are employed while there are not used in Sledds
text. In addition, official style is more applied in Berlins text. Except complex sentences that are

Li 6
verbose and unspeakable, in Berlins text, slow sentence opening and passive voice are also used.
This can explain why the result of their readability text are different. In Berlins piece, the
Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease is 27.3, which is low, and the Average Grade Level is 16.2. In
Sledds piece, the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease is 43.8 and the Average Grade Level is 15.7 . It is
shown that Berlins text is harder to understand.
After analyzing prose style strategies, lets see how the two authors express their ideas.
First, how dose Sledd present his idea? Sledd uses terms: Standard English and AAVE to express
that both of them are important and no one is superior to another. He says that forced
assimilation . . . is far less important than the social analysis (62). Forced assimilation means
pushing Standard English upon students, which is not important in his view. Standard English is
not the only important language. Keeping nonstandard English is also important. He explains
that the great majority of those who learn a nonstandard dialect in their childhood will continue
to use it, more or less modified by schooling and adult experience but still recognizable, as long
as they live. They should not be asked to use the standard, or punished for not using it (62)
because he thinks that to ask the weak and unprivileged to completely abandon the language of
their daily livesis inhumane, brutal, and futile (60). Another reason is that it would be stupid
to stifle diversity altogether (60). So in Sledds opinion, Standard English and AAVE are binary
and equal. He wants to change peoples hierarchical view about the two categories of language,
especially for teachers of English.
Next, lets look at how Berlin wrote his deconstructive idea. In Berlins writing, he
applied Derridas diffrance to express his signifier and signified on rhetoric ideas. He quoted the
explanation of Derridas diffrance from Vincent Leitch (1983), (1) to differto be unlike or
dissimilar in nature, quality, or form; (2) differre (Latin)to scatter, disperse; and (3) to

Li 7
deferto delay, postpone Berlin explained a term has meaning because it stands in
oppositional relation to other terms of its class (63). Berlin said a term has meaning because it
stands in oppositional relation to other terms of its class (61). He means all meanings in the
world have to be deconstructive. This is Derridas to scatter. If a signified is meaningful,
according to Berlin, it is because of the relations between a signifier and other signifiers. The
opposite meaning anther signifiers gives make the signified meaningful. Otherwise, the signified
means nothing. So, signifier and signified have no connection. This is Derridas to differ. As
he said, signifiers have meaning as a result of their relation to other signifiers in a structured
system of signs (61). As we know, language is used by human being. Meanings are made up by
people through language. We become signifiers, but we, as human being, are not perfect. We
cannot reach the real truth. This is Derridas to defer. As he said, Derrida denied that the sign
signifier can ever capture the external signified (64). Therefore, it cannot say which one is
absolutely right or wrong. In Berlins opinion, there is no hierarchy relation between signifiers
and signifiers.
According to Berlin, all meanings of signified are equal within horizontal relation, which
is similar to the Sledds horizontal view towards the relation between Standard English and
nonstandard English. However, the way he expressed is very different from Sledds. Berlin
applies Derridas concepts of diffrance, which is very terminology and abstract, and is not easy
to understand. To the contrary, Sledd uses a very practical and concrete sample: Standard English
and nonstandard English.
In conclusion, from the analysis I have already discussed above, Sledds Grammar for
Social Awareness in Time of Class Warfare and Berlins Rhetorics, Poetics, and Cultures:
Refiguring College English Studies are both under the genre of academic writing for English

Li 8
studies, but rhetorical devices are also used differently and Berlins text is more inclined to be
official style. In term of the different ways of conveying the similar ideas, Berlin applies
Derridas concepts of diffrance, which is very terminology and abstract, and is not easy to
understand. To the contrary, Sledd uses a very practical and concrete sample: Standard English
and nonstandard English. However, since the differences have been discuss, there are questions
needed to think about in order to push the genre study into a deeper level: what factors cause the
two writings different? What is the main factor? As the title of Berlins text shows, his writing
aims at college English studies. So, Berlins audience (English scholars, English professors or
English major students, as we mentioned above) are at higher level than Sledds audience who
arrange from low educational level English teachers to college English teachers. Do you think
the audience is the main factor that causes Berlins text more elusive? If so, why does Berlin do
that? Is it in order to challenge or instruct aspiring English scholars or professors? What about
Sledd?

Li 9
References
Berlin, James. A. Rhetorics, Poetics, and Cultures: Refiguring College English Studies. West
Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press, 2003. Print.
Sledd, James. Grammar for Social Awareness in Time of Class Warfare. English Journal. 95.7
(1996): 59-63. Print.