However, Kozol does not confine himself to only simple sentences. He closes the essay with one of his longest sentences: "The answers to these questions represent a reasonable test of out belief in the democracy to which we have been asked in public school to swear allegiance." Although longer, the sentence is nevertheless clear. Kozol tends to use his shortest, most straightforward, at the beginning of each paragraph. As the reader delves deeper into the paragraph, the sentences become slightly longer, although even the longest sentences read easily because they are broken up by commas, parallel structure and semi columns. However, generally, by the end of the paragraph, Kozol reverts to his simple syntax, to reiterate his point,
Kozol's simple sentence structure makes his essay highly accessible to the masses. Poor readers do not have to filter through complicated sentences to find meaning in the work. Instead, Kozol presents his ideas clearly and simply. Although his essay is not intended for illiterates, it is meant to inform the entire literate portion of the nation of this issue. This concise syntax enables a greater majority of US citizens to read his essay and therefore understand the problem of illiteracy. In fact, many of Kozol's sentences, such as his claim "The human price [of illiteracy] is not so obvious at first," would be decipherable and understood (if read aloud of course) by even a non-reader. Kozol's syntax echoes his goal (to stop the problem of illiteracy in American through educating literate citizens about it), making the intent of his essay apparent.
I agree with your statement: "Kozol's syntax echoes his goal (to stop the problem of illiteracy in American through educating literate citizens about it), making the intent of his essay apparent", because the structure and syntax add much to the meaning of the essay. I also pointed out the fact that huis sentences are precise and short, I agree with you. You analyzed the passage very well.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the concise syntax is helpful in reiterating his original point as it is perhaps more powerful. It echoes the fact that illiterates "cannot move up and can't move out."
ReplyDeleteYour opening comment regarding the way in which the short and choppy sentences reflect the societal conditions the illiterate face is very true. Kozol definitely chose to include those sentences as a representation of their forced confined lifestyle. Additionally, I agree with your analysis of Kozol's choice of simple sentence structure. This essay is meant to be easy to comprehend, thus making it accessible to a vastly larger audience.
ReplyDeleteIt is very true that all of his setences are clear no matter the length, however the use of punctuation escaped my observation. Looking back, because the sentences are broken up it does make the meaning come across much more clearly than if the audience had to decipher it on their on. I agree with you when you say that even for the more illiterate audience the essay is easier to understand, that was a good observation.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad that you focused on the syntax, as most people wrote about the use of examples and pathos to convey the idea. Good job identifying that he has his shorter and straightforward sentences in the start of a paragraph, almost like it is in the form of a small essay each time. I'm sure Kozol was making it his main priority to make his essay as acessable as possible because of his audience and subject matter.
ReplyDeleteI like the way you say illiteracy is a form of oppression. Yet I think it is a form of self-imposed oppression because in this country if one wants to read and write one can do it.
ReplyDeleteI like that you identify the purpose of the syntax in making the essay itself more largely available to the masses. I did not note the use of punctuation though it does make sense that even in longer sentences, there is clarity in the writing and in the larger structure of the passage.
ReplyDelete