What is Wollstonecraft’s discourse community?
Discourse community of Wollstonecraft is the society especially women
What is Young’s?
Discourse community of Young is the society (disabled people)
What’s the issue each of these women are sharing about their discourse community?
Wollstonecraft : rights and duties of women
Yong : dismissing disabled people
Who is the intended audience for each work?
Wollstonecraft : Women
Yong : normal people
How are the letter and speech similar? How are they different?
They are both talking about social issues but these mentioned issues are different
What are the writing strategies Wollstonecraft implements? What are Young’s? (Do they use examples, humor, or logic? Do they cite sources?)
Wollstonecraft used logical strategies and gave examples and sources while Young used her sense of humor and gave also examples.
Which did you feel more connected with? Why?
I was more connected to Young’s speech because she used comedy and humor.
Paragraph 1: Wollstonecraft
Why is Wollstonecraft writing this letter? What is the issue she identifies?
Wollstonecraft is writing this letter to talk about women’s rights, their differences and national education and she identifies the issue of women discrimination in society.
Explain why Wollstonecraft sees the issue as a problem.
This issue is a problem to Wo
After reading this letter, how would you identify Wollstonecraft’s discourse community? Does the recipient seem to be a part of this group or outside of it?
Paragraph 2: Young
Why is Young writing/presenting this speech? What is the issue she identifies?
Young is presenting this speech because she feels that it’s her duty to identify the social issue “ the way of treating disabled ”
Explain why Young sees the issue as a problem.
Young sees the way of treating disabled is a problem because she sees disabled as they are called are also normal people they are noy exceptional and they should be treated as normal people.
After reading this letter, how would you identify Young’s discourse community? Does the recipient seem to be a part of this group or outside of it?
Sir: Having read with great pleasure a pamphlet on National Education that you recently published, I dedicate this volume to you, to induce you to reconsider the subject and maturely weigh what I shall say about the rights of woman and national education; and I’m calling with the firm tone of humanity. [‘National education’ is the topic of the penultimate chapter, starting on page 93.] In these arguments, sir, I am not trying to get anything for myself; I plead not for myself but for my sex. ·My own personal wants, anyway, amount to very little·. For many years I have regarded independence as the great blessing of life, the basis of every virtue; and even if I end up living on a barren heath, I will always guarantee my independence by contracting my wants. So it is my affection for the whole human race that •makes my pen speed along to support what I believe to be the cause of virtue, and •leads me to long to see woman’s place in the world enable her to advance the progress of the glorious principles that give a substance to morality, rather than holding them back. My opinion about the rights and duties of woman seems to flow so naturally from those simple principles that it seems almost inevitable that some of the enlarged minds who formed your admirable constitution will agree with me.
Knowledge is spread more widely in France than in any ·other· part of Europe; and I attribute this in large measure to the social intercourse there has long been in France between the sexes. It is true (I’m going to speak freely) that in France the very essence of sensuality has been extracted for the pleasure of the voluptuary, and a kind of sentimental lust [see Glossary] has prevailed. This, together with the system of deceptiveness that the whole spirit of their political and civil government taught, have given a sinister sort of knowingness to the French character. . . .and a polish of manners that injures the substance by driving sincerity out of society. And modesty—the fairest garb of virtue—has been more grossly insulted in France than even in England; the ·minimal· attention to decency that ·even· brutes instinctively observe is regarded by French women as prudish! Manners and morals are so closely related that they have often been confused with one another; but although manners should be only the natural reflection of morals, when various causes have produced unnatural and corrupt manners that infect even the young, morality becomes an empty name. Personal restraint and respect for cleanliness and delicacy in domestic life are the graceful pillars of modesty, but French women almost despise them. If the pure flame of patriotism has reached their hearts, they should work
Leave a Reply